Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakry...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 7:29 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <t...@redhat.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Turns out there were a few more instances where libbpf didn't save the
>> errno before writing an error message, causing errno to be overridden by
>> the printf() return and the error disappearing if logging is enabled.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <t...@redhat.com>
>> ---
>
> Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andr...@fb.com>
>
>> tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 12 +++++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
>> index 0a06124f7999..fd256440e233 100644
>> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
>> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
>> @@ -3478,10 +3478,11 @@ bpf_object__probe_global_data(struct bpf_object *obj)
>>
>> map = bpf_create_map_xattr(&map_attr);
>> if (map < 0) {
>> - cp = libbpf_strerror_r(errno, errmsg, sizeof(errmsg));
>> + ret = -errno;
>> + cp = libbpf_strerror_r(-ret, errmsg, sizeof(errmsg));
>
> fyi, libbpf_strerror_r() is smart enough to work with both negative
> and positive error numbers (it basically takes abs(err)), so no need
> to ensure it's positive here and below.
Noted. Although that also means it doesn't hurt either, I suppose; so
not going to bother respinning this unless someone insists :)
-Toke
