From: Roberto Sassu [mailto:roberto.sassu@huawei.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2022 9:47 AM

quoted

From: Alexei Starovoitov [mailto:alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2022 11:34 PM
On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 06:59:28PM +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote:

quoted

+
+static int __init bpf_key_sig_kfuncs_init(void)
+{
+	int ret;
+
+	ret = register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING,
+					&bpf_key_sig_kfunc_set);
+	if (!ret)
+		return 0;
+
+	return register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_LSM,
+					 &bpf_key_sig_kfunc_set);

Isn't this a watery water ?
Don't you have a patch 1 ?
What am I missing ?

Uhm, yes. I had doubts too. That was what also KP did.

It makes sense to register once, since we mapped LSM to
TRACING.

Will resend only this patch. And I will figure out why CI failed.

Adding in CC Daniel Müller, which worked on this.

I think the issue is that some kernel options are set to =m.
This causes the CI to miss all kernel modules, since they are
not copied to the virtual machine that executes the tests.

I'm testing this patch:

https://github.com/robertosassu/libbpf-ci/commit/b665e001b58c4ddb792a2a68098ea5dc6936b15c

Roberto