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: <20220712030813.865410-1-pulehui@huawei.com> <20220712030813.865410-2-pulehui@huawei.com>
 <e1dd40cd-647c-10b4-53f9-a313e509474e@isovalent.com> <0c8f6067-0d5b-c1f7-2048-0ed4add76e73@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <0c8f6067-0d5b-c1f7-2048-0ed4add76e73@huawei.com>
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 Jul 2022 11:50:30 -0700
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzYvLZcDD0dfYWnc_FNchJ=ptxwnkvca40Xo_LF7Lr+c5g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] samples: bpf: Fix cross-compiling error by
 using bootstrap bpftool
To:     Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>
Cc:     Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        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>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 4:32 AM Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2022/7/12 18:11, Quentin Monnet wrote:
> > On 12/07/2022 04:08, Pu Lehui wrote:
> >> Currently, when cross compiling bpf samples, the host side cannot
> >> use arch-specific bpftool to generate vmlinux.h or skeleton. Since
> >> samples/bpf use bpftool for vmlinux.h, skeleton, and static linking
> >> only, we can use lightweight bootstrap version of bpftool to handle
> >> these, and it's always host-native.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>
> >> Suggested-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> >> ---
> >>   samples/bpf/Makefile | 16 +++++++++++-----
> >>   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/samples/bpf/Makefile b/samples/bpf/Makefile
> >> index 5002a5b9a7da..57012b8259d2 100644
> >> --- a/samples/bpf/Makefile
> >> +++ b/samples/bpf/Makefile
> >> @@ -282,12 +282,18 @@ $(LIBBPF): $(wildcard $(LIBBPF_SRC)/*.[ch] $(LIBBPF_SRC)/Makefile) | $(LIBBPF_OU
> >>
> >>   BPFTOOLDIR := $(TOOLS_PATH)/bpf/bpftool
> >>   BPFTOOL_OUTPUT := $(abspath $(BPF_SAMPLES_PATH))/bpftool
> >> -BPFTOOL := $(BPFTOOL_OUTPUT)/bpftool
> >> +BPFTOOL := $(BPFTOOL_OUTPUT)/bootstrap/bpftool
> >> +ifeq ($(CROSS_COMPILE),)
> >>   $(BPFTOOL): $(LIBBPF) $(wildcard $(BPFTOOLDIR)/*.[ch] $(BPFTOOLDIR)/Makefile) | $(BPFTOOL_OUTPUT)
> >> -        $(MAKE) -C $(BPFTOOLDIR) srctree=$(BPF_SAMPLES_PATH)/../../ \
> >> -            OUTPUT=$(BPFTOOL_OUTPUT)/ \
> >> -            LIBBPF_OUTPUT=$(LIBBPF_OUTPUT)/ \
> >> -            LIBBPF_DESTDIR=$(LIBBPF_DESTDIR)/
> >> +    $(MAKE) -C $(BPFTOOLDIR) srctree=$(BPF_SAMPLES_PATH)/../../             \
> >> +            OUTPUT=$(BPFTOOL_OUTPUT)/                                       \
> >> +            LIBBPF_BOOTSTRAP_OUTPUT=$(LIBBPF_OUTPUT)/                       \
> >> +            LIBBPF_BOOTSTRAP_DESTDIR=$(LIBBPF_DESTDIR)/ bootstrap
> >> +else
> >> +$(BPFTOOL): $(wildcard $(BPFTOOLDIR)/*.[ch] $(BPFTOOLDIR)/Makefile) | $(BPFTOOL_OUTPUT)
> >
> > Thanks for this! Just trying to fully understand the details here. When
> > cross-compiling, you leave aside the dependency on target-arch-libbpf,
> > so that "make -C <bpftool-dir> bootstrap" rebuilds its own host-arch
> > libbpf, is this correct?
> >
>
> You're right. libbpf may does get out-of-sync. So the best way is to
> compile both arch-specific libbpf simultaneously, and then attach to
> bpftool. But it will make this job more complicated. Could we just add
> back $(LIBBPF) to handle this?
>

Maybe let's keep it simple and let bpftool's Makefile deal with
cross-compile issue and building its own libbpf? So just request
bootstrap, but not try to share libbpf between samples/bpf and
bpftool? Especially that is this "samples", such complexity in
Makefile seems like a micro-optimization.

> >> +    $(MAKE) -C $(BPFTOOLDIR) srctree=$(BPF_SAMPLES_PATH)/../../             \
> >> +            OUTPUT=$(BPFTOOL_OUTPUT)/ bootstrap
> >> +endif
> >>
> >>   $(LIBBPF_OUTPUT) $(BPFTOOL_OUTPUT):
> >>      $(call msg,MKDIR,$@)
> >
> > .
> >