On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 04:46:25PM -0800, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> [Recent commit 23499442c319 ("bpf: libbpf: retry map creation without
> the name") fixed this issue for maps, let's do the same for programs.]
>
> Since commit 88cda1c9da02 ("bpf: libbpf: Provide basic API support
> to specify BPF obj name"), libbpf unconditionally sets bpf_attr->name
> for programs. Pre v4.14 kernels don't know about programs names and
> return an error about unexpected non-zero data. Retry sys_bpf without
> a program name to cover older kernels.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <s...@google.com>
> ---
> tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> index 961e1b9fc592..cbe9d757c646 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> @@ -212,6 +212,16 @@ int bpf_load_program_xattr(const struct
> bpf_load_program_attr *load_attr,
> if (fd >= 0 || !log_buf || !log_buf_sz)
> return fd;
>
> + if (fd < 0 && errno == E2BIG && load_attr->name) {
> + /* Retry the same syscall, but without the name.
> + * Pre v4.14 kernels don't support prog names.
> + */
I'm afraid that will put unnecessary stress on the kernel.
This check needs to be tighter.
Like E2BIG and anything in the log_buf probably means that
E2BIG came from the verifier and nothing to do with prog_name.
Asking kernel to repeat is an unnecessary work.
In general we need to think beyond this single prog_name field.
There are bunch of other fields in bpf_load_program_xattr() and older kernels
won't support them. Are we going to zero them out one by one
and retry? I don't think that would be practical.
Also libbpf silently ignoring prog_name is not great for debugging.
A warning is needed.
But it cannot be done out of lib/bpf/bpf.c, since it's a set of syscall
wrappers.
Imo such "old kernel -> lets retry" feature should probably be done
at lib/bpf/libbpf.c level. inside load_program().
