public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jose E. Marchesi" <jose.marchesi@oracle.com>
To: David Faust <david.faust@oracle.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf: avoid issues with CO-RE and -gtoggle
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 19:46:55 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87le51z65s.fsf@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240425172113.7912-1-david.faust@oracle.com> (David Faust's message of "Thu, 25 Apr 2024 10:21:13 -0700")


Hi Faust.
OK.  Thanks for the patch.

> Compiling a BPF program with CO-RE relocations (and BTF) while also
> passing -gtoggle led to an inconsistent state where CO-RE support was
> enabled but BTF would not be generated, and this was not caught by the
> existing option parsing.  This led to an ICE when generating the CO-RE
> relocation info, since BTF is required for CO-RE.
>
> Update bpf_option_override to avoid this case, and add a few tests for
> the interactions of these options.
>
> Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu host for bpf-unknown-none target.
>
> gcc/
> 	* config/bpf/bpf.cc (bpf_option_override): Improve handling of CO-RE
> 	options to avoid issues with -gtoggle.
>
> gcc/testsuite/
> 	* gcc.target/bpf/core-options-1.c: New test.
> 	* gcc.target/bpf/core-options-2.c: Likewise.
> 	* gcc.target/bpf/core-options-3.c: Likewise.
> ---
>  gcc/config/bpf/bpf.cc                         |  7 +++++--
>  gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-1.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
>  gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-2.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
>  gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-3.c |  5 +++++
>  4 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-1.c
>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-2.c
>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-3.c
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/bpf/bpf.cc b/gcc/config/bpf/bpf.cc
> index 98fb755bb8b..e6ea211a2c6 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/bpf/bpf.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/bpf/bpf.cc
> @@ -192,7 +192,8 @@ bpf_option_override (void)
>    init_machine_status = bpf_init_machine_status;
>  
>    /* BPF CO-RE support requires BTF debug info generation.  */
> -  if (TARGET_BPF_CORE && !btf_debuginfo_p ())
> +  if (TARGET_BPF_CORE
> +      && (!btf_debuginfo_p () || (debug_info_level < DINFO_LEVEL_NORMAL)))
>      error ("BPF CO-RE requires BTF debugging information, use %<-gbtf%>");
>  
>    /* BPF applications always generate .BTF.ext.  */
> @@ -215,7 +216,9 @@ bpf_option_override (void)
>  
>    /* -gbtf implies -mcore when using the BPF backend, unless -mno-co-re
>       is specified.  */
> -  if (btf_debuginfo_p () && !(target_flags_explicit & MASK_BPF_CORE))
> +  if (btf_debuginfo_p ()
> +      && (debug_info_level >= DINFO_LEVEL_NORMAL)
> +      && !(target_flags_explicit & MASK_BPF_CORE))
>      target_flags |= MASK_BPF_CORE;
>  
>    /* Determine available features from ISA setting (-mcpu=).  */
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-1.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..7d8c677f239
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-1.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
> +/* -gbtf for the BPF target should enable CO-RE support automatically.  */
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> +/* { dg-options "-gbtf" } */
> +
> +struct A {
> +  int x;
> +  int y;
> +  char c;
> +};
> +
> +int
> +foo (struct A *a) {
> +  int y = __builtin_preserve_access_index (a->y);
> +  return y;
> +}
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-2.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..8f466258e29
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-2.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> +/* { dg-options "-gbtf -gtoggle" } */
> +
> +struct A {
> +  int x;
> +  int y;
> +  char c;
> +};
> +
> +int
> +foo (struct A *a) {
> +  int y = __builtin_preserve_access_index (a->y); /* { dg-error "BPF CO-RE is required" } */
> +  return y;
> +}
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-3.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..ca32a7c4012
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/core-options-3.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
> +/* This combination of options tries to enable CO-RE without BTF, and should
> +   produce an error.  */
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> +/* { dg-options "-gbtf -gtoggle -mco-re" } */
> +/* { dg-excess-errors "BPF CO-RE requires BTF debugging information" } */

      reply	other threads:[~2024-04-25 17:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-04-25 17:21 David Faust
2024-04-25 17:46 ` Jose E. Marchesi [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87le51z65s.fsf@oracle.com \
    --to=jose.marchesi@oracle.com \
    --cc=david.faust@oracle.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).