Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220227142551.2349805-1-james.hilliard1@gmail.com> <6af1530a-a4bf-dccf-947d-78ce235a4414@iogearbox.net>
In-Reply-To: <6af1530a-a4bf-dccf-947d-78ce235a4414@iogearbox.net>
From:   James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 5 Mar 2022 02:54:41 -0700
Message-ID: <CADvTj4pOE+WD1rmS4S6kazeJWtoRTi5Ng_gJXVUkZwC_xMCySA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] libbpf: ensure F_DUPFD_CLOEXEC is defined
To:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc:     bpf@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 8:00 AM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> wrot=
e:
>
> Hi James,
>
> On 2/27/22 3:25 PM, James Hilliard wrote:
> > This definition seems to be missing from some older toolchains.
> >
> > Note that the fcntl.h in libbpf_internal.h is not a kernel header
> > but rather a toolchain libc header.
> >
> > Fixes:
> > libbpf_internal.h:521:18: error: 'F_DUPFD_CLOEXEC' undeclared (first us=
e in this function); did you mean 'FD_CLOEXEC'?
> >     fd =3D fcntl(fd, F_DUPFD_CLOEXEC, 3);
> >                    ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >                    FD_CLOEXEC
> >
> > Signed-off-by: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>
>
> Do you have some more info on your env (e.g. libc)? Looks like F_DUPFD_CL=
OEXEC
> was added back in 2.6.24 kernel. When did libc add it?
>
> Should we instead just add an include for <linux/fcntl.h> to libbpf_inter=
nal.h
> (given it defines F_DUPFD_CLOEXEC as well)?

That seems to cause a conflict: error: redefinition of =E2=80=98struct floc=
k=E2=80=99


>
> > ---
> >   tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h | 4 ++++
> >   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_int=
ernal.h
> > index 4fda8bdf0a0d..d2a86b5a457a 100644
> > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h
> > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h
> > @@ -31,6 +31,10 @@
> >   #define EM_BPF 247
> >   #endif
> >
> > +#ifndef F_DUPFD_CLOEXEC
> > +#define F_DUPFD_CLOEXEC 1030
> > +#endif
> > +
> >   #ifndef R_BPF_64_64
> >   #define R_BPF_64_64 1
> >   #endif
> >
>
> Thanks,
> Daniel