Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix bpf_loop regression on kernel < 5.13 #162

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Feb 22, 2023

Conversation

MatteoNardi
Copy link
Contributor

Fix #158 by compiling and embedding two eBPF programs:

  • On kernel >= 5.13 we'll use the same code as before
  • On kernel < 5.13 we'll compile a version with NOLOOP defined.

This requires #156 to be merged first.

I have

  • run cargo fmt;
  • run cargo clippy;
  • run cargo testand all tests pass;
  • linked to the originating issue (if applicable).

@MatteoNardi MatteoNardi linked an issue Feb 17, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
1 task
Compile and embed two eBPF programs for each *.bpf.c source:
- On kernel < 5.13 NOLOOP is defined and we won't take the address
  of functions.
- On kernel >= 5.13, the regular LOOP macro can be used.

Fix #158
@MatteoNardi MatteoNardi force-pushed the 158-bug-failed-on-debianbullseye64 branch from fb3a7ae to 49f4fde Compare February 21, 2023 13:00
Copy link
Member

@banditopazzo banditopazzo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

probe_noloop.bpf.o can be renamed according to the new name

@MatteoNardi MatteoNardi merged commit 23bc356 into main Feb 22, 2023
@MatteoNardi MatteoNardi deleted the 158-bug-failed-on-debianbullseye64 branch February 22, 2023 08:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Bug]: failed on debian/bullseye64
2 participants