On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 08:51:37PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> @@ -215,6 +215,8 @@ struct btf {
> struct btf *base_btf;
> u32 start_id; /* first type ID in this BTF (0 for base BTF) */
> u32 start_str_off; /* first string offset (0 for base BTF) */
> + char name[MODULE_NAME_LEN];
> + bool kernel_btf;
> };
>
> enum verifier_phase {
> @@ -4441,6 +4443,7 @@ struct btf *btf_parse_vmlinux(void)
>
> btf->data = __start_BTF;
> btf->data_size = __stop_BTF - __start_BTF;
> + btf->kernel_btf = true;
imo it's a bit weird for vmlinux's BTF to be flagged as 'kernel_btf'
and empty name, but kernel module's BTFs will not be marked as kernel,
but will have a name.
I think it's more natural to make vmlinux and module's BTF with kernel_btf=true
flag
and give "vmlinux" name to base kernel BTF.
If somebody creates a kernel module with "vmlinux" name we will have a conflict,
but that name is for human pretty printing only anyway, so I think it's fine.
