| Message ID | 20181102190108.29507-1-ps.report@gmx.net |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v1] libv4l: add missing bpf_common.h header | expand |
Hello, On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 20:01:08 +0100, Peter Seiderer wrote: > Fixes [1] (for older toolchains not providing this header): > > CC keytable.o > In file included from bpf.h:26:0, > from keytable.c:37: > ../../include/linux/bpf.h:12:10: fatal error: linux/bpf_common.h: No such file or directory > #include <linux/bpf_common.h> > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > [1] http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/d22c0939eed4bc949f7eaeae7595d01ec45cc2cd > > Signed-off-by: Peter Seiderer <ps.report@gmx.net> > --- > .../0005-Add-missing-linux-bpf_common.h.patch | 80 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 80 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 package/libv4l/0005-Add-missing-linux-bpf_common.h.patch Applied to master, thanks. Could you submit this upstream? Thanks! Thomas
Hello Thomas, On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 14:28:10 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> wrote: > Hello, > > On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 20:01:08 +0100, Peter Seiderer wrote: > > Fixes [1] (for older toolchains not providing this header): > > > > CC keytable.o > > In file included from bpf.h:26:0, > > from keytable.c:37: > > ../../include/linux/bpf.h:12:10: fatal error: linux/bpf_common.h: No such file or directory > > #include <linux/bpf_common.h> > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > [1] http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/d22c0939eed4bc949f7eaeae7595d01ec45cc2cd > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Seiderer <ps.report@gmx.net> > > --- > > .../0005-Add-missing-linux-bpf_common.h.patch | 80 +++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 80 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 package/libv4l/0005-Add-missing-linux-bpf_common.h.patch > > Applied to master, thanks. Could you submit this upstream? Thanks! Yes, just done, see [1]... Regards, Peter [1] https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-media@vger.kernel.org/msg136103.html > > Thomas
Dear Peter, Le lun. 5 nov. 2018 à 21:59, Peter Seiderer <ps.report@gmx.net> a écrit : > > Hello Thomas, > > On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 14:28:10 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 20:01:08 +0100, Peter Seiderer wrote: > > > Fixes [1] (for older toolchains not providing this header): > > > > > > CC keytable.o > > > In file included from bpf.h:26:0, > > > from keytable.c:37: > > > ../../include/linux/bpf.h:12:10: fatal error: linux/bpf_common.h: No such file or directory > > > #include <linux/bpf_common.h> > > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > [1] http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/d22c0939eed4bc949f7eaeae7595d01ec45cc2cd > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Seiderer <ps.report@gmx.net> > > > --- > > > .../0005-Add-missing-linux-bpf_common.h.patch | 80 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 80 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 package/libv4l/0005-Add-missing-linux-bpf_common.h.patch > > > > Applied to master, thanks. Could you submit this upstream? Thanks! > > Yes, just done, see [1]... Thanks for submitting this patch however build failures remain on some architectures (ARM cortex a8 / a9 / arm926ej-s) with "old" kernel headers (3.13) : - http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/b48/b48f9b284102d94b847a35ed1ca50a157fbcb1c9/build-end.log - http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/339/3391705aca7022111ef743212b7cad57f0cdea9a/build-end.log Build failures are raised because _NR_bpf is not defined: bpf.c:48:4: error: #error __NR_bpf not defined. libbpf does not support your arch. # error __NR_bpf not defined. libbpf does not support your arch. From my understanding, __NR_bpf should be normally defined by the kernel (when it is not too old). For example, __NR_bpf has been defined for m68k and powerpc since 3.18: - https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/f7bbd12a4b7e088f53f20dd31019984459699fb9 - https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/fcbb539f279f7d854bd49819b889fea0612909f8 The code in bpf.c only defines fallback for very few few architectures: i386, x86_64, aarch64, sparc and s390. So finally, should we add a dependency on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HEADERS_AT_LEAST_3_18 on a new BR2_PACKAGE_LIBV4L_KEYTABLE_BPF_PROTOCOLS option? > > Regards, > Peter > > [1] https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-media@vger.kernel.org/msg136103.html > > > > > Thomas > Best Regards, Fabrice
Hello Fabrice, On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 21:01:31 +0100, Fabrice Fontaine <fontaine.fabrice@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Peter, > Le lun. 5 nov. 2018 à 21:59, Peter Seiderer <ps.report@gmx.net> a écrit : > > > > Hello Thomas, > > > > On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 14:28:10 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 20:01:08 +0100, Peter Seiderer wrote: > > > > Fixes [1] (for older toolchains not providing this header): > > > > > > > > CC keytable.o > > > > In file included from bpf.h:26:0, > > > > from keytable.c:37: > > > > ../../include/linux/bpf.h:12:10: fatal error: linux/bpf_common.h: No such file or directory > > > > #include <linux/bpf_common.h> > > > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > > > [1] http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/d22c0939eed4bc949f7eaeae7595d01ec45cc2cd > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Seiderer <ps.report@gmx.net> > > > > --- > > > > .../0005-Add-missing-linux-bpf_common.h.patch | 80 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 80 insertions(+) > > > > create mode 100644 package/libv4l/0005-Add-missing-linux-bpf_common.h.patch > > > > > > Applied to master, thanks. Could you submit this upstream? Thanks! > > > > Yes, just done, see [1]... > Thanks for submitting this patch however build failures remain on some > architectures (ARM cortex a8 / a9 / arm926ej-s) with "old" kernel > headers (3.13) : > - http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/b48/b48f9b284102d94b847a35ed1ca50a157fbcb1c9/build-end.log > - http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/339/3391705aca7022111ef743212b7cad57f0cdea9a/build-end.log > > Build failures are raised because _NR_bpf is not defined: > > bpf.c:48:4: error: #error __NR_bpf not defined. libbpf does not > support your arch. > # error __NR_bpf not defined. libbpf does not support your arch. > > From my understanding, __NR_bpf should be normally defined by the > kernel (when it is not too old). > For example, __NR_bpf has been defined for m68k and powerpc since 3.18: > - https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/f7bbd12a4b7e088f53f20dd31019984459699fb9 > - https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/fcbb539f279f7d854bd49819b889fea0612909f8 > The code in bpf.c only defines fallback for very few few > architectures: i386, x86_64, aarch64, sparc and s390. > > So finally, should we add a dependency on > BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HEADERS_AT_LEAST_3_18 on a new > BR2_PACKAGE_LIBV4L_KEYTABLE_BPF_PROTOCOLS option? Or add a fallback value for arm (need to investigate the right value for it)... Regards, Peter > > > > Regards, > > Peter > > > > [1] https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-media@vger.kernel.org/msg136103.html > > > > > > > > Thomas > > > Best Regards, > > Fabrice
>>>>> "Fabrice" == Fabrice Fontaine <fontaine.fabrice@gmail.com> writes: Hi, > Thanks for submitting this patch however build failures remain on some > architectures (ARM cortex a8 / a9 / arm926ej-s) with "old" kernel > headers (3.13) : > - http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/b48/b48f9b284102d94b847a35ed1ca50a157fbcb1c9/build-end.log > - http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/339/3391705aca7022111ef743212b7cad57f0cdea9a/build-end.log > Build failures are raised because _NR_bpf is not defined: > bpf.c:48:4: error: #error __NR_bpf not defined. libbpf does not > support your arch. > # error __NR_bpf not defined. libbpf does not support your arch. > From my understanding, __NR_bpf should be normally defined by the > kernel (when it is not too old). > For example, __NR_bpf has been defined for m68k and powerpc since 3.18: > - https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/f7bbd12a4b7e088f53f20dd31019984459699fb9 > - https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/fcbb539f279f7d854bd49819b889fea0612909f8 > The code in bpf.c only defines fallback for very few few > architectures: i386, x86_64, aarch64, sparc and s390. But the fallback only fixes setups with older kernel headers than the runtime kernel, which is IMHO fairly rare in Buildroot - Unless the tool works correctly when the bpf syscall fails. > So finally, should we add a dependency on > BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HEADERS_AT_LEAST_3_18 on a new > BR2_PACKAGE_LIBV4L_KEYTABLE_BPF_PROTOCOLS option? The BPF_PROTOCOLS conditional seems to be about using clang to compile bdf byte code, which is not directly the code that is failing here. If it is easy to disable bpf support completely, then that is probably the nicest solution, otherwise I am fine with depending on 3.18, that is after all almost 4 years old by now.
Dear Peter, Le mer. 7 nov. 2018 à 17:59, Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com> a écrit : > > >>>>> "Fabrice" == Fabrice Fontaine <fontaine.fabrice@gmail.com> writes: > > Hi, > > > Thanks for submitting this patch however build failures remain on some > > architectures (ARM cortex a8 / a9 / arm926ej-s) with "old" kernel > > headers (3.13) : > > - http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/b48/b48f9b284102d94b847a35ed1ca50a157fbcb1c9/build-end.log > > - http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/339/3391705aca7022111ef743212b7cad57f0cdea9a/build-end.log > > > Build failures are raised because _NR_bpf is not defined: > > > bpf.c:48:4: error: #error __NR_bpf not defined. libbpf does not > > support your arch. > > # error __NR_bpf not defined. libbpf does not support your arch. > > > From my understanding, __NR_bpf should be normally defined by the > > kernel (when it is not too old). > > For example, __NR_bpf has been defined for m68k and powerpc since 3.18: > > - https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/f7bbd12a4b7e088f53f20dd31019984459699fb9 > > - https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/fcbb539f279f7d854bd49819b889fea0612909f8 > > The code in bpf.c only defines fallback for very few few > > architectures: i386, x86_64, aarch64, sparc and s390. > > But the fallback only fixes setups with older kernel headers than the > runtime kernel, which is IMHO fairly rare in Buildroot - Unless the tool > works correctly when the bpf syscall fails. > > > So finally, should we add a dependency on > > BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HEADERS_AT_LEAST_3_18 on a new > > BR2_PACKAGE_LIBV4L_KEYTABLE_BPF_PROTOCOLS option? > > The BPF_PROTOCOLS conditional seems to be about using clang to compile > bdf byte code, which is not directly the code that is failing here. > > If it is easy to disable bpf support completely, then that is probably > the nicest solution, otherwise I am fine with depending on 3.18, that is > after all almost 4 years old by now. Thanks for your feedback, I will add a --without-libelf option to configure.ac. > > -- > Bye, Peter Korsgaard Best Regards, Fabrice
Hello Fabrice, On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 20:05:51 +0100, Fabrice Fontaine <fontaine.fabrice@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Peter, > Le mer. 7 nov. 2018 à 17:59, Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com> a écrit : > > > > >>>>> "Fabrice" == Fabrice Fontaine <fontaine.fabrice@gmail.com> writes: > > > > Hi, > > > > > Thanks for submitting this patch however build failures remain on some > > > architectures (ARM cortex a8 / a9 / arm926ej-s) with "old" kernel > > > headers (3.13) : > > > - http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/b48/b48f9b284102d94b847a35ed1ca50a157fbcb1c9/build-end.log > > > - http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/339/3391705aca7022111ef743212b7cad57f0cdea9a/build-end.log > > > > > Build failures are raised because _NR_bpf is not defined: > > > > > bpf.c:48:4: error: #error __NR_bpf not defined. libbpf does not > > > support your arch. > > > # error __NR_bpf not defined. libbpf does not support your arch. > > > > > From my understanding, __NR_bpf should be normally defined by the > > > kernel (when it is not too old). > > > For example, __NR_bpf has been defined for m68k and powerpc since 3.18: > > > - https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/f7bbd12a4b7e088f53f20dd31019984459699fb9 > > > - https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/fcbb539f279f7d854bd49819b889fea0612909f8 > > > The code in bpf.c only defines fallback for very few few > > > architectures: i386, x86_64, aarch64, sparc and s390. > > > > But the fallback only fixes setups with older kernel headers than the > > runtime kernel, which is IMHO fairly rare in Buildroot - Unless the tool > > works correctly when the bpf syscall fails. > > > > > So finally, should we add a dependency on > > > BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HEADERS_AT_LEAST_3_18 on a new > > > BR2_PACKAGE_LIBV4L_KEYTABLE_BPF_PROTOCOLS option? > > > > The BPF_PROTOCOLS conditional seems to be about using clang to compile > > bdf byte code, which is not directly the code that is failing here. > > > > If it is easy to disable bpf support completely, then that is probably > > the nicest solution, otherwise I am fine with depending on 3.18, that is > > after all almost 4 years old by now. > Thanks for your feedback, I will add a --without-libelf option to configure.ac. No libelf is not enough for disabling bpf, see the autobuild failure [1]: [...] checking for LIBELF... no configure: WARNING: libelf library not available [...] In file included from bpf.h:26:0, from keytable.c:37: ../../include/linux/bpf.h:12:30: fatal error: linux/bpf_common.h: No such file or directory #include <linux/bpf_common.h> ^ Maybe take a look at the upstream efforts: [PATCH v2 v4l-utils] configure: build without BPF support in ir-keytable https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/52841/ Regards, Peter [1] http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/d22c0939eed4bc949f7eaeae7595d01ec45cc2cd/build-end.log > > > > -- > > Bye, Peter Korsgaard > Best Regards, > > Fabrice
diff --git a/package/libv4l/0005-Add-missing-linux-bpf_common.h.patch b/package/libv4l/0005-Add-missing-linux-bpf_common.h.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..d43ea70027 --- /dev/null +++ b/package/libv4l/0005-Add-missing-linux-bpf_common.h.patch @@ -0,0 +1,80 @@ +From 311e344039d58cfde09dd34f14804db8ac0513c9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From: Peter Seiderer <ps.report@gmx.net> +Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2018 18:58:53 +0100 +Subject: [PATCH] Add missing linux/bpf_common.h + +Copy from [1], needed by bpf.h. + +https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/plain/include/uapi/linux/bpf_common.h?h=v4.19 +Signed-off-by: Peter Seiderer <ps.report@gmx.net> +--- + include/linux/bpf_common.h | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+) + create mode 100644 include/linux/bpf_common.h + +diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_common.h b/include/linux/bpf_common.h +new file mode 100644 +index 00000000..ee97668b +--- /dev/null ++++ b/include/linux/bpf_common.h +@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ ++/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note */ ++#ifndef _UAPI__LINUX_BPF_COMMON_H__ ++#define _UAPI__LINUX_BPF_COMMON_H__ ++ ++/* Instruction classes */ ++#define BPF_CLASS(code) ((code) & 0x07) ++#define BPF_LD 0x00 ++#define BPF_LDX 0x01 ++#define BPF_ST 0x02 ++#define BPF_STX 0x03 ++#define BPF_ALU 0x04 ++#define BPF_JMP 0x05 ++#define BPF_RET 0x06 ++#define BPF_MISC 0x07 ++ ++/* ld/ldx fields */ ++#define BPF_SIZE(code) ((code) & 0x18) ++#define BPF_W 0x00 /* 32-bit */ ++#define BPF_H 0x08 /* 16-bit */ ++#define BPF_B 0x10 /* 8-bit */ ++/* eBPF BPF_DW 0x18 64-bit */ ++#define BPF_MODE(code) ((code) & 0xe0) ++#define BPF_IMM 0x00 ++#define BPF_ABS 0x20 ++#define BPF_IND 0x40 ++#define BPF_MEM 0x60 ++#define BPF_LEN 0x80 ++#define BPF_MSH 0xa0 ++ ++/* alu/jmp fields */ ++#define BPF_OP(code) ((code) & 0xf0) ++#define BPF_ADD 0x00 ++#define BPF_SUB 0x10 ++#define BPF_MUL 0x20 ++#define BPF_DIV 0x30 ++#define BPF_OR 0x40 ++#define BPF_AND 0x50 ++#define BPF_LSH 0x60 ++#define BPF_RSH 0x70 ++#define BPF_NEG 0x80 ++#define BPF_MOD 0x90 ++#define BPF_XOR 0xa0 ++ ++#define BPF_JA 0x00 ++#define BPF_JEQ 0x10 ++#define BPF_JGT 0x20 ++#define BPF_JGE 0x30 ++#define BPF_JSET 0x40 ++#define BPF_SRC(code) ((code) & 0x08) ++#define BPF_K 0x00 ++#define BPF_X 0x08 ++ ++#ifndef BPF_MAXINSNS ++#define BPF_MAXINSNS 4096 ++#endif ++ ++#endif /* _UAPI__LINUX_BPF_COMMON_H__ */ +-- +2.19.1 +
Fixes [1] (for older toolchains not providing this header): CC keytable.o In file included from bpf.h:26:0, from keytable.c:37: ../../include/linux/bpf.h:12:10: fatal error: linux/bpf_common.h: No such file or directory #include <linux/bpf_common.h> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [1] http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/d22c0939eed4bc949f7eaeae7595d01ec45cc2cd Signed-off-by: Peter Seiderer <ps.report@gmx.net> --- .../0005-Add-missing-linux-bpf_common.h.patch | 80 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 80 insertions(+) create mode 100644 package/libv4l/0005-Add-missing-linux-bpf_common.h.patch