lib/bpf: Fix log level in verbose mode with libbpf
Subsystems (3)
PATCH 1/1 lib/bpf: Fix log level in verbose mode with libbpf
Before commit c04e45d083e8 ("lib/bpf: fix verbose flag when using libbpf"), the verifier logs were not displayed when the verbose flag was passed. Commit c04e45d083e8 fixed that bug but enabled the incorrect log level. This commit fixes it.
The kernel supports two log levels. With level 1, the verifier dumps instructions along each visited path with the verifier state for some. With level 2, only instructions for the last visited path are dumped but each instruction is preceded by its verifier state.
Log level 1 probably makes the most sense for the verbose flag as it has the most comprehensive information (full traversal of the program by the verifier). It also matches the log level when not using libbpf.
--- lib/bpf_libbpf.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
lib/bpf_libbpf.c +1 -1
@@ -305,7 +305,7 @@ static int load_bpf_object(struct bpf_cfg_in *cfg) attr.obj = obj;if (cfg->verbose) - attr.log_level =2 ; + attr.log_level =1 ; ret =bpf_object__load_xattr (&attr);if (ret)
Signature · 1 line
2.25.1
lib/bpf_libbpf.c static int load_bpf_object(struct bpf_cfg_in *cfg) · line 311
Quoted 13 lines · Paul Chaignon
lib/bpf_libbpf.c +1
-1@@ -305,7 +305,7 @@ static int load_bpf_object(struct bpf_cfg_in *cfg) attr.obj = obj;if (cfg->verbose) - attr.log_level =2 ; + attr.log_level =1 ; ret =bpf_object__load_xattr (&attr);if (ret)
ip and tc do not have verbosity flags, but there is show_details. Why not tie the log_level to that?
Quoted 12 lines · David Ahern
Quoted 11 lines · Paul Chaignon
lib/bpf_libbpf.c +1
-1@@ -305,7 +305,7 @@ static int load_bpf_object(struct bpf_cfg_in *cfg) attr.obj = obj;if (cfg->verbose) - attr.log_level =2 ; + attr.log_level =1 ;
Quoted 5 lines
lib/bpf_libbpf.c static int load_bpf_object(struct bpf_cfg_in *cfg) · line 311
Quoted 2 lines
lib/bpf_libbpf.c +0
-0ret =bpf_object__load_xattr (&attr);if (ret)ip and tc do not have verbosity flags, but there is
show_details. Why not tie thelog_levelto that?
I'm not sure I understand what you're proposing. This code is referring to the "verbose" parameter of the tc filter command, as in e.g.:
tc filter replace dev eth0 ingress bpf da obj prog.o sec sec1 verbose
Are you proposing we replace that parameter with the existing -details option?
Quoted 19 lines · Paul Chaignon
Quoted 12 lines · David Ahern
Quoted 11 lines · Paul Chaignon
lib/bpf_libbpf.c +1
-1@@ -305,7 +305,7 @@ static int load_bpf_object(struct bpf_cfg_in *cfg) attr.obj = obj;if (cfg->verbose) - attr.log_level =2 ; + attr.log_level =1 ;Quoted 5 lines
lib/bpf_libbpf.c static int load_bpf_object(struct bpf_cfg_in *cfg) · line 311
Quoted 2 lines
lib/bpf_libbpf.c +0
-0ret =bpf_object__load_xattr (&attr);if (ret)ip and tc do not have verbosity flags, but there is
show_details. Why not tie thelog_levelto that?
Quoted 8 lines
I'm not sure I understand what you're proposing. This code is referring to the "verbose" parameter of the tc filter command, as in e.g.:
tc filter replace dev eth0 ingress bpf da obj prog.o sec sec1 verbose
Are you proposing we replace that parameter with the existing -details option?
just proposing that log_level not be hardcoded and coming from the command line. Connecting with verbose arg makes more sense. How to extend it to let the user control verbosity