Our MPTCP CI complained [1] -- and KBuild too -- that it was no longer
possible to build the kernel without CONFIG_CGROUPS:
kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_new':
kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:14: error: 'CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS' undeclared (first use in this function)
919 | case CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS | CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED:
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:14: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:36: error: 'CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED' undeclared (first use in this function)
919 | case CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS | CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED:
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:927:60: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type 'struct css_task_iter'
927 | kit->css_it = bpf_mem_alloc(&bpf_global_ma, sizeof(struct css_task_iter));
| ^~~~~~
kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:930:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_start'; did you mean 'task_seq_start'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
930 | css_task_iter_start(css, flags, kit->css_it);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| task_seq_start
kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_next':
kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:940:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_next'; did you mean 'class_dev_iter_next'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
940 | return css_task_iter_next(kit->css_it);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| class_dev_iter_next
kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:940:16: error: returning 'int' from a function with return type 'struct task_struct *' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
940 | return css_task_iter_next(kit->css_it);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_destroy':
kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:949:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_end' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
949 | css_task_iter_end(kit->css_it);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This patch simply surrounds with a #ifdef the new code requiring CGroups
support. It seems enough for the compiler and this is similar to
bpf_iter_css_{new,next,destroy}() functions where no other #ifdef have
been added in kernel/bpf/helpers.c and in the selftests.
Fixes: 9c66dc94b62a ("bpf: Introduce css_task open-coded iterator kfuncs")
Link: https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/actions/runs/6665206927
Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/[email protected]/
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Baerts <[email protected]>
---
kernel/bpf/task_iter.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/task_iter.c b/kernel/bpf/task_iter.c
index 59e747938bdb..e0d313114a5b 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/task_iter.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/task_iter.c
@@ -894,6 +894,8 @@ __bpf_kfunc void bpf_iter_task_vma_destroy(struct bpf_iter_task_vma *it)
__diag_pop();
+#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUPS
+
struct bpf_iter_css_task {
__u64 __opaque[1];
} __attribute__((aligned(8)));
@@ -952,6 +954,8 @@ __bpf_kfunc void bpf_iter_css_task_destroy(struct bpf_iter_css_task *it)
__diag_pop();
+#endif /* CONFIG_CGROUPS */
+
struct bpf_iter_task {
__u64 __opaque[3];
} __attribute__((aligned(8)));
---
base-commit: f1c73396133cb3d913e2075298005644ee8dfade
change-id: 20231031-bpf-compil-err-css-056f3db04860
Best regards,
--
Matthieu Baerts <[email protected]>
On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 04:49:34PM +0100, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> Our MPTCP CI complained [1] -- and KBuild too -- that it was no longer
> possible to build the kernel without CONFIG_CGROUPS:
>
> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_new':
> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:14: error: 'CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS' undeclared (first use in this function)
> 919 | case CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS | CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED:
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:14: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:36: error: 'CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED' undeclared (first use in this function)
> 919 | case CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS | CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED:
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:927:60: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type 'struct css_task_iter'
> 927 | kit->css_it = bpf_mem_alloc(&bpf_global_ma, sizeof(struct css_task_iter));
> | ^~~~~~
> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:930:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_start'; did you mean 'task_seq_start'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 930 | css_task_iter_start(css, flags, kit->css_it);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> | task_seq_start
> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_next':
> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:940:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_next'; did you mean 'class_dev_iter_next'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 940 | return css_task_iter_next(kit->css_it);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> | class_dev_iter_next
> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:940:16: error: returning 'int' from a function with return type 'struct task_struct *' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
> 940 | return css_task_iter_next(kit->css_it);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_destroy':
> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:949:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_end' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 949 | css_task_iter_end(kit->css_it);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> This patch simply surrounds with a #ifdef the new code requiring CGroups
> support. It seems enough for the compiler and this is similar to
> bpf_iter_css_{new,next,destroy}() functions where no other #ifdef have
> been added in kernel/bpf/helpers.c and in the selftests.
>
> Fixes: 9c66dc94b62a ("bpf: Introduce css_task open-coded iterator kfuncs")
> Link: https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/actions/runs/6665206927
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/[email protected]/
> Signed-off-by: Matthieu Baerts <[email protected]>
Acked/Tested-by: Jiri Olsa <[email protected]>
jirka
> ---
> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/task_iter.c b/kernel/bpf/task_iter.c
> index 59e747938bdb..e0d313114a5b 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/task_iter.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/task_iter.c
> @@ -894,6 +894,8 @@ __bpf_kfunc void bpf_iter_task_vma_destroy(struct bpf_iter_task_vma *it)
>
> __diag_pop();
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUPS
> +
> struct bpf_iter_css_task {
> __u64 __opaque[1];
> } __attribute__((aligned(8)));
> @@ -952,6 +954,8 @@ __bpf_kfunc void bpf_iter_css_task_destroy(struct bpf_iter_css_task *it)
>
> __diag_pop();
>
> +#endif /* CONFIG_CGROUPS */
> +
> struct bpf_iter_task {
> __u64 __opaque[3];
> } __attribute__((aligned(8)));
>
> ---
> base-commit: f1c73396133cb3d913e2075298005644ee8dfade
> change-id: 20231031-bpf-compil-err-css-056f3db04860
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Matthieu Baerts <[email protected]>
>
On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 10:05 AM Jiri Olsa <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 04:49:34PM +0100, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> > Our MPTCP CI complained [1] -- and KBuild too -- that it was no longer
> > possible to build the kernel without CONFIG_CGROUPS:
> >
> > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_new':
> > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:14: error: 'CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS' undeclared (first use in this function)
> > 919 | case CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS | CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED:
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:14: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:36: error: 'CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED' undeclared (first use in this function)
> > 919 | case CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS | CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED:
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:927:60: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type 'struct css_task_iter'
> > 927 | kit->css_it = bpf_mem_alloc(&bpf_global_ma, sizeof(struct css_task_iter));
> > | ^~~~~~
> > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:930:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_start'; did you mean 'task_seq_start'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > 930 | css_task_iter_start(css, flags, kit->css_it);
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > | task_seq_start
> > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_next':
> > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:940:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_next'; did you mean 'class_dev_iter_next'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > 940 | return css_task_iter_next(kit->css_it);
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > | class_dev_iter_next
> > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:940:16: error: returning 'int' from a function with return type 'struct task_struct *' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
> > 940 | return css_task_iter_next(kit->css_it);
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_destroy':
> > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:949:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_end' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > 949 | css_task_iter_end(kit->css_it);
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > This patch simply surrounds with a #ifdef the new code requiring CGroups
> > support. It seems enough for the compiler and this is similar to
> > bpf_iter_css_{new,next,destroy}() functions where no other #ifdef have
> > been added in kernel/bpf/helpers.c and in the selftests.
> >
> > Fixes: 9c66dc94b62a ("bpf: Introduce css_task open-coded iterator kfuncs")
> > Link: https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/actions/runs/6665206927
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/[email protected]/
> > Signed-off-by: Matthieu Baerts <[email protected]>
>
> Acked/Tested-by: Jiri Olsa <[email protected]>
I believe this patch has the same issue as Arnd's patch:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAADnVQL-zoFPPOVu3nM981gKxRu7Q3G3LTRsKstJEeahpoR1RQ@mail.gmail.com/
I'd like to merge the fix asap. Please make it a complete fix.
On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 08:54:56PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 10:05 AM Jiri Olsa <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 04:49:34PM +0100, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> > > Our MPTCP CI complained [1] -- and KBuild too -- that it was no longer
> > > possible to build the kernel without CONFIG_CGROUPS:
> > >
> > > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_new':
> > > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:14: error: 'CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS' undeclared (first use in this function)
> > > 919 | case CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS | CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED:
> > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:14: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> > > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:36: error: 'CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED' undeclared (first use in this function)
> > > 919 | case CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS | CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED:
> > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:927:60: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type 'struct css_task_iter'
> > > 927 | kit->css_it = bpf_mem_alloc(&bpf_global_ma, sizeof(struct css_task_iter));
> > > | ^~~~~~
> > > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:930:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_start'; did you mean 'task_seq_start'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > 930 | css_task_iter_start(css, flags, kit->css_it);
> > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > | task_seq_start
> > > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_next':
> > > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:940:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_next'; did you mean 'class_dev_iter_next'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > 940 | return css_task_iter_next(kit->css_it);
> > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > | class_dev_iter_next
> > > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:940:16: error: returning 'int' from a function with return type 'struct task_struct *' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
> > > 940 | return css_task_iter_next(kit->css_it);
> > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_destroy':
> > > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:949:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_end' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > 949 | css_task_iter_end(kit->css_it);
> > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >
> > > This patch simply surrounds with a #ifdef the new code requiring CGroups
> > > support. It seems enough for the compiler and this is similar to
> > > bpf_iter_css_{new,next,destroy}() functions where no other #ifdef have
> > > been added in kernel/bpf/helpers.c and in the selftests.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 9c66dc94b62a ("bpf: Introduce css_task open-coded iterator kfuncs")
> > > Link: https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/actions/runs/6665206927
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
> > > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/[email protected]/
> > > Signed-off-by: Matthieu Baerts <[email protected]>
> >
> > Acked/Tested-by: Jiri Olsa <[email protected]>
>
> I believe this patch has the same issue as Arnd's patch:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAADnVQL-zoFPPOVu3nM981gKxRu7Q3G3LTRsKstJEeahpoR1RQ@mail.gmail.com/
>
> I'd like to merge the fix asap. Please make it a complete fix.
ugh, it won't fail the build, it just warns.. I think we should
fail the build in that case, I'll check
jirka
Hi Jirka, Alexei,
On 01/11/2023 08:25, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 08:54:56PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 10:05 AM Jiri Olsa <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 04:49:34PM +0100, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
>>>> Our MPTCP CI complained [1] -- and KBuild too -- that it was no longer
>>>> possible to build the kernel without CONFIG_CGROUPS:
>>>>
>>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_new':
>>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:14: error: 'CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS' undeclared (first use in this function)
>>>> 919 | case CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS | CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED:
>>>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:14: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
>>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:36: error: 'CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED' undeclared (first use in this function)
>>>> 919 | case CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS | CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED:
>>>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:927:60: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type 'struct css_task_iter'
>>>> 927 | kit->css_it = bpf_mem_alloc(&bpf_global_ma, sizeof(struct css_task_iter));
>>>> | ^~~~~~
>>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:930:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_start'; did you mean 'task_seq_start'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> 930 | css_task_iter_start(css, flags, kit->css_it);
>>>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>> | task_seq_start
>>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_next':
>>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:940:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_next'; did you mean 'class_dev_iter_next'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> 940 | return css_task_iter_next(kit->css_it);
>>>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>> | class_dev_iter_next
>>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:940:16: error: returning 'int' from a function with return type 'struct task_struct *' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
>>>> 940 | return css_task_iter_next(kit->css_it);
>>>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_destroy':
>>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:949:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_end' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> 949 | css_task_iter_end(kit->css_it);
>>>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>>
>>>> This patch simply surrounds with a #ifdef the new code requiring CGroups
>>>> support. It seems enough for the compiler and this is similar to
>>>> bpf_iter_css_{new,next,destroy}() functions where no other #ifdef have
>>>> been added in kernel/bpf/helpers.c and in the selftests.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 9c66dc94b62a ("bpf: Introduce css_task open-coded iterator kfuncs")
>>>> Link: https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/actions/runs/6665206927
>>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
>>>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/[email protected]/
>>>> Signed-off-by: Matthieu Baerts <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Acked/Tested-by: Jiri Olsa <[email protected]>
>>
>> I believe this patch has the same issue as Arnd's patch:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAADnVQL-zoFPPOVu3nM981gKxRu7Q3G3LTRsKstJEeahpoR1RQ@mail.gmail.com/
@Alexei: Arf, sorry, I didn't find this patch when searching for
"9c66dc94b62a" on lore. I don't know why I didn't search for the commit
title as usual...
>> I'd like to merge the fix asap. Please make it a complete fix.
>
> ugh, it won't fail the build, it just warns.. I think we should
> fail the build in that case, I'll check
@Jirka: Thank you for checking that! Please tell me if you want me to
send a v2 or if you prefer to do that. I don't mind if you prefer to
send your own patches, as long as there is a fix for that at the end :)
Note that if a warning is emitted for these new bpf_iter_css_task_*()
functions, I guess you will have the same issue with bpf_iter_css_*()
and probably others as mentioned in my commit message.
Cheers,
Matt
On Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 09:25:34AM +0100, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> Hi Jirka, Alexei,
>
> On 01/11/2023 08:25, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 08:54:56PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> >> On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 10:05 AM Jiri Olsa <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 04:49:34PM +0100, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> >>>> Our MPTCP CI complained [1] -- and KBuild too -- that it was no longer
> >>>> possible to build the kernel without CONFIG_CGROUPS:
> >>>>
> >>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_new':
> >>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:14: error: 'CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS' undeclared (first use in this function)
> >>>> 919 | case CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS | CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED:
> >>>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:14: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> >>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:919:36: error: 'CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED' undeclared (first use in this function)
> >>>> 919 | case CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS | CSS_TASK_ITER_THREADED:
> >>>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:927:60: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type 'struct css_task_iter'
> >>>> 927 | kit->css_it = bpf_mem_alloc(&bpf_global_ma, sizeof(struct css_task_iter));
> >>>> | ^~~~~~
> >>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:930:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_start'; did you mean 'task_seq_start'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >>>> 930 | css_task_iter_start(css, flags, kit->css_it);
> >>>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>>> | task_seq_start
> >>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_next':
> >>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:940:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_next'; did you mean 'class_dev_iter_next'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >>>> 940 | return css_task_iter_next(kit->css_it);
> >>>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>>> | class_dev_iter_next
> >>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:940:16: error: returning 'int' from a function with return type 'struct task_struct *' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
> >>>> 940 | return css_task_iter_next(kit->css_it);
> >>>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c: In function 'bpf_iter_css_task_destroy':
> >>>> kernel/bpf/task_iter.c:949:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_task_iter_end' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >>>> 949 | css_task_iter_end(kit->css_it);
> >>>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>>>
> >>>> This patch simply surrounds with a #ifdef the new code requiring CGroups
> >>>> support. It seems enough for the compiler and this is similar to
> >>>> bpf_iter_css_{new,next,destroy}() functions where no other #ifdef have
> >>>> been added in kernel/bpf/helpers.c and in the selftests.
> >>>>
> >>>> Fixes: 9c66dc94b62a ("bpf: Introduce css_task open-coded iterator kfuncs")
> >>>> Link: https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/actions/runs/6665206927
> >>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
> >>>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/[email protected]/
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Matthieu Baerts <[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>> Acked/Tested-by: Jiri Olsa <[email protected]>
> >>
> >> I believe this patch has the same issue as Arnd's patch:
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAADnVQL-zoFPPOVu3nM981gKxRu7Q3G3LTRsKstJEeahpoR1RQ@mail.gmail.com/
>
> @Alexei: Arf, sorry, I didn't find this patch when searching for
> "9c66dc94b62a" on lore. I don't know why I didn't search for the commit
> title as usual...
>
> >> I'd like to merge the fix asap. Please make it a complete fix.
> >
> > ugh, it won't fail the build, it just warns.. I think we should
> > fail the build in that case, I'll check
>
> @Jirka: Thank you for checking that! Please tell me if you want me to
> send a v2 or if you prefer to do that. I don't mind if you prefer to
> send your own patches, as long as there is a fix for that at the end :)
>
> Note that if a warning is emitted for these new bpf_iter_css_task_*()
> functions, I guess you will have the same issue with bpf_iter_css_*()
> and probably others as mentioned in my commit message.
Arnd,
are you planning to send new version for your patch [1] ?
we have a patch collision ;-)
I can send v2 if needed.. so far I'm checking the change below
jirka
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAADnVQL-zoFPPOVu3nM981gKxRu7Q3G3LTRsKstJEeahpoR1RQ@mail.gmail.com/
---
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
index e46ac288a108..95449ea7cc1b 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
@@ -2564,15 +2564,17 @@ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_num_destroy, KF_ITER_DESTROY)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_task_vma_new, KF_ITER_NEW | KF_RCU)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_task_vma_next, KF_ITER_NEXT | KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_task_vma_destroy, KF_ITER_DESTROY)
+#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUPS
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_css_task_new, KF_ITER_NEW | KF_TRUSTED_ARGS)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_css_task_next, KF_ITER_NEXT | KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_css_task_destroy, KF_ITER_DESTROY)
-BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_task_new, KF_ITER_NEW | KF_TRUSTED_ARGS | KF_RCU_PROTECTED)
-BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_task_next, KF_ITER_NEXT | KF_RET_NULL)
-BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_task_destroy, KF_ITER_DESTROY)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_css_new, KF_ITER_NEW | KF_TRUSTED_ARGS | KF_RCU_PROTECTED)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_css_next, KF_ITER_NEXT | KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_css_destroy, KF_ITER_DESTROY)
+#endif
+BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_task_new, KF_ITER_NEW | KF_TRUSTED_ARGS | KF_RCU_PROTECTED)
+BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_task_next, KF_ITER_NEXT | KF_RET_NULL)
+BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_task_destroy, KF_ITER_DESTROY)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_dynptr_adjust)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_dynptr_is_null)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_dynptr_is_rdonly)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/task_iter.c b/kernel/bpf/task_iter.c
index 59e747938bdb..e0d313114a5b 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/task_iter.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/task_iter.c
@@ -894,6 +894,8 @@ __bpf_kfunc void bpf_iter_task_vma_destroy(struct bpf_iter_task_vma *it)
__diag_pop();
+#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUPS
+
struct bpf_iter_css_task {
__u64 __opaque[1];
} __attribute__((aligned(8)));
@@ -952,6 +954,8 @@ __bpf_kfunc void bpf_iter_css_task_destroy(struct bpf_iter_css_task *it)
__diag_pop();
+#endif /* CONFIG_CGROUPS */
+
struct bpf_iter_task {
__u64 __opaque[3];
} __attribute__((aligned(8)));
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index e42ce974b106..f2afb17a1534 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -5421,7 +5421,9 @@ static bool in_rcu_cs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
/* Once GCC supports btf_type_tag the following mechanism will be replaced with tag check */
BTF_SET_START(rcu_protected_types)
BTF_ID(struct, prog_test_ref_kfunc)
+#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUPS
BTF_ID(struct, cgroup)
+#endif
BTF_ID(struct, bpf_cpumask)
BTF_ID(struct, task_struct)
BTF_SET_END(rcu_protected_types)
@@ -10873,7 +10875,9 @@ BTF_ID(func, bpf_dynptr_clone)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_percpu_obj_new_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_percpu_obj_drop_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_throw)
+#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUPS
BTF_ID(func, bpf_iter_css_task_new)
+#endif
BTF_SET_END(special_kfunc_set)
BTF_ID_LIST(special_kfunc_list)
@@ -10899,7 +10903,11 @@ BTF_ID(func, bpf_dynptr_clone)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_percpu_obj_new_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_percpu_obj_drop_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_throw)
+#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUPS
BTF_ID(func, bpf_iter_css_task_new)
+#else
+BTF_ID_UNUSED
+#endif
static bool is_kfunc_ret_null(struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta *meta)
{