| Message ID | 20220705190308.1063813-5-jolsa@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | RFC |
| Delegated to: | BPF |
| Headers | show |
| Series | bpf: Fixes for CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT | expand |
On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 12:04 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> wrote: > > The kprobe can be placed anywhere and user must be aware > of the underlying instructions. Therefore fixing just > the bpf program to 'fix' the address to match the actual > function address when CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT is enabled. > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> > --- > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c | 7 +++++-- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > index a587aeca5ae0..220d56b7c1dc 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ > #include <linux/bpf.h> > #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h> > #include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h> > +#include <stdbool.h> > > char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL"; > > @@ -13,6 +14,8 @@ extern const void bpf_modify_return_test __ksym; > extern const void bpf_fentry_test6 __ksym; > extern const void bpf_fentry_test7 __ksym; > > +extern bool CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT __kconfig __weak; > + > __u64 test1_result = 0; > SEC("fentry/bpf_fentry_test1") > int BPF_PROG(test1, int a) > @@ -37,7 +40,7 @@ __u64 test3_result = 0; > SEC("kprobe/bpf_fentry_test3") > int test3(struct pt_regs *ctx) > { > - __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx); > + __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx) - (CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT ? 4 : 0); so for kprobe bpf_get_func_ip() gets an address with 5 byte compensation for `call __fentry__`, but not for endr? Why can't we compensate for endbr inside the kernel code as well? I'd imagine we either do no compensation (and thus we get &bpf_fentry_test3+5 or &bpf_fentry_test3+9, depending on CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT) or full compensation (and thus always get &bpf_fentry_test3), but this in-between solution seems to be the worst of both worlds?... > > test3_result = (const void *) addr == &bpf_fentry_test3; > return 0; > @@ -47,7 +50,7 @@ __u64 test4_result = 0; > SEC("kretprobe/bpf_fentry_test4") > int BPF_KRETPROBE(test4) > { > - __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx); > + __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx) - (CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT ? 4 : 0); > > test4_result = (const void *) addr == &bpf_fentry_test4; > return 0; > -- > 2.35.3 >
On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 10:29:17PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 12:04 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > The kprobe can be placed anywhere and user must be aware > > of the underlying instructions. Therefore fixing just > > the bpf program to 'fix' the address to match the actual > > function address when CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT is enabled. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> > > --- > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c | 7 +++++-- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > > index a587aeca5ae0..220d56b7c1dc 100644 > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > > @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ > > #include <linux/bpf.h> > > #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h> > > #include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h> > > +#include <stdbool.h> > > > > char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL"; > > > > @@ -13,6 +14,8 @@ extern const void bpf_modify_return_test __ksym; > > extern const void bpf_fentry_test6 __ksym; > > extern const void bpf_fentry_test7 __ksym; > > > > +extern bool CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT __kconfig __weak; > > + > > __u64 test1_result = 0; > > SEC("fentry/bpf_fentry_test1") > > int BPF_PROG(test1, int a) > > @@ -37,7 +40,7 @@ __u64 test3_result = 0; > > SEC("kprobe/bpf_fentry_test3") > > int test3(struct pt_regs *ctx) > > { > > - __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx); > > + __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx) - (CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT ? 4 : 0); > > so for kprobe bpf_get_func_ip() gets an address with 5 byte > compensation for `call __fentry__`, but not for endr? Why can't we > compensate for endbr inside the kernel code as well? I'd imagine we > either do no compensation (and thus we get &bpf_fentry_test3+5 or > &bpf_fentry_test3+9, depending on CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT) or full > compensation (and thus always get &bpf_fentry_test3), but this > in-between solution seems to be the worst of both worlds?... hm rigth, I guess we should be able to do that in bpf_get_func_ip, I'll check thanks, jirka > > > > > test3_result = (const void *) addr == &bpf_fentry_test3; > > return 0; > > @@ -47,7 +50,7 @@ __u64 test4_result = 0; > > SEC("kretprobe/bpf_fentry_test4") > > int BPF_KRETPROBE(test4) > > { > > - __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx); > > + __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx) - (CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT ? 4 : 0); > > > > test4_result = (const void *) addr == &bpf_fentry_test4; > > return 0; > > -- > > 2.35.3 > >
On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 12:16:35AM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 10:29:17PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 12:04 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > The kprobe can be placed anywhere and user must be aware > > > of the underlying instructions. Therefore fixing just > > > the bpf program to 'fix' the address to match the actual > > > function address when CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT is enabled. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> > > > --- > > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c | 7 +++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > > > index a587aeca5ae0..220d56b7c1dc 100644 > > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > > > @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ > > > #include <linux/bpf.h> > > > #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h> > > > #include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h> > > > +#include <stdbool.h> > > > > > > char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL"; > > > > > > @@ -13,6 +14,8 @@ extern const void bpf_modify_return_test __ksym; > > > extern const void bpf_fentry_test6 __ksym; > > > extern const void bpf_fentry_test7 __ksym; > > > > > > +extern bool CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT __kconfig __weak; > > > + > > > __u64 test1_result = 0; > > > SEC("fentry/bpf_fentry_test1") > > > int BPF_PROG(test1, int a) > > > @@ -37,7 +40,7 @@ __u64 test3_result = 0; > > > SEC("kprobe/bpf_fentry_test3") > > > int test3(struct pt_regs *ctx) > > > { > > > - __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx); > > > + __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx) - (CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT ? 4 : 0); > > > > so for kprobe bpf_get_func_ip() gets an address with 5 byte > > compensation for `call __fentry__`, but not for endr? Why can't we > > compensate for endbr inside the kernel code as well? I'd imagine we > > either do no compensation (and thus we get &bpf_fentry_test3+5 or > > &bpf_fentry_test3+9, depending on CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT) or full > > compensation (and thus always get &bpf_fentry_test3), but this > > in-between solution seems to be the worst of both worlds?... > > hm rigth, I guess we should be able to do that in bpf_get_func_ip, > I'll check sorry for late follow up.. so the problem is that you can place kprobe anywhere in the function (on instruction boundary) but the IBT adjustment of kprobe address is made only if it's at the function entry and there's endbr instruction and that kprobe address is what we return in helper: BPF_CALL_1(bpf_get_func_ip_kprobe, struct pt_regs *, regs) { struct kprobe *kp = kprobe_running(); return kp ? (uintptr_t)kp->addr : 0; } so the adjustment would work only for address at function entry, but would be wrong for address within the function perhaps we could add flag to kprobe to indicate the addr adjustment was done and use it in helper but that's why I thought I'd keep bpf_get_func_ip_kprobe as it and leave it up to user kprobe_multi and trampolines are different, because they can be only at the function entry, so we can adjust the ip properly jirka
On 7/18/22 00:43, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 12:16:35AM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 10:29:17PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 12:04 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> The kprobe can be placed anywhere and user must be aware >>>> of the underlying instructions. Therefore fixing just >>>> the bpf program to 'fix' the address to match the actual >>>> function address when CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT is enabled. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> >>>> --- >>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c | 7 +++++-- >>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c >>>> index a587aeca5ae0..220d56b7c1dc 100644 >>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c >>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c >>>> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ >>>> #include <linux/bpf.h> >>>> #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h> >>>> #include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h> >>>> +#include <stdbool.h> >>>> >>>> char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL"; >>>> >>>> @@ -13,6 +14,8 @@ extern const void bpf_modify_return_test __ksym; >>>> extern const void bpf_fentry_test6 __ksym; >>>> extern const void bpf_fentry_test7 __ksym; >>>> >>>> +extern bool CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT __kconfig __weak; >>>> + >>>> __u64 test1_result = 0; >>>> SEC("fentry/bpf_fentry_test1") >>>> int BPF_PROG(test1, int a) >>>> @@ -37,7 +40,7 @@ __u64 test3_result = 0; >>>> SEC("kprobe/bpf_fentry_test3") >>>> int test3(struct pt_regs *ctx) >>>> { >>>> - __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx); >>>> + __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx) - (CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT ? 4 : 0); >>> >>> so for kprobe bpf_get_func_ip() gets an address with 5 byte >>> compensation for `call __fentry__`, but not for endr? Why can't we >>> compensate for endbr inside the kernel code as well? I'd imagine we >>> either do no compensation (and thus we get &bpf_fentry_test3+5 or >>> &bpf_fentry_test3+9, depending on CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT) or full >>> compensation (and thus always get &bpf_fentry_test3), but this >>> in-between solution seems to be the worst of both worlds?... >> >> hm rigth, I guess we should be able to do that in bpf_get_func_ip, >> I'll check > > sorry for late follow up.. > > so the problem is that you can place kprobe anywhere in the function > (on instruction boundary) but the IBT adjustment of kprobe address is > made only if it's at the function entry and there's endbr instruction To add more fun to the issue, not all non-inlined functions get endbr64. For example "skb_release_head_state()" does, while "skb_free_head()" doesn't. > > and that kprobe address is what we return in helper: > > BPF_CALL_1(bpf_get_func_ip_kprobe, struct pt_regs *, regs) > { > struct kprobe *kp = kprobe_running(); > > return kp ? (uintptr_t)kp->addr : 0; > } > > so the adjustment would work only for address at function entry, but > would be wrong for address within the function > > perhaps we could add flag to kprobe to indicate the addr adjustment > was done and use it in helper > > but that's why I thought I'd keep bpf_get_func_ip_kprobe as it and > leave it up to user > > kprobe_multi and trampolines are different, because they can be > only at the function entry, so we can adjust the ip properly > > jirka
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 02:09:54PM +0300, Martynas Pumputis wrote: > > > On 7/18/22 00:43, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 12:16:35AM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 10:29:17PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 12:04 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The kprobe can be placed anywhere and user must be aware > > > > > of the underlying instructions. Therefore fixing just > > > > > the bpf program to 'fix' the address to match the actual > > > > > function address when CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT is enabled. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> > > > > > --- > > > > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c | 7 +++++-- > > > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > > > > > index a587aeca5ae0..220d56b7c1dc 100644 > > > > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > > > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > > > > > @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ > > > > > #include <linux/bpf.h> > > > > > #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h> > > > > > #include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h> > > > > > +#include <stdbool.h> > > > > > > > > > > char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL"; > > > > > > > > > > @@ -13,6 +14,8 @@ extern const void bpf_modify_return_test __ksym; > > > > > extern const void bpf_fentry_test6 __ksym; > > > > > extern const void bpf_fentry_test7 __ksym; > > > > > > > > > > +extern bool CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT __kconfig __weak; > > > > > + > > > > > __u64 test1_result = 0; > > > > > SEC("fentry/bpf_fentry_test1") > > > > > int BPF_PROG(test1, int a) > > > > > @@ -37,7 +40,7 @@ __u64 test3_result = 0; > > > > > SEC("kprobe/bpf_fentry_test3") > > > > > int test3(struct pt_regs *ctx) > > > > > { > > > > > - __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx); > > > > > + __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx) - (CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT ? 4 : 0); > > > > > > > > so for kprobe bpf_get_func_ip() gets an address with 5 byte > > > > compensation for `call __fentry__`, but not for endr? Why can't we > > > > compensate for endbr inside the kernel code as well? I'd imagine we > > > > either do no compensation (and thus we get &bpf_fentry_test3+5 or > > > > &bpf_fentry_test3+9, depending on CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT) or full > > > > compensation (and thus always get &bpf_fentry_test3), but this > > > > in-between solution seems to be the worst of both worlds?... > > > > > > hm rigth, I guess we should be able to do that in bpf_get_func_ip, > > > I'll check > > > > sorry for late follow up.. > > > > so the problem is that you can place kprobe anywhere in the function > > (on instruction boundary) but the IBT adjustment of kprobe address is > > made only if it's at the function entry and there's endbr instruction > > To add more fun to the issue, not all non-inlined functions get endbr64. For > example "skb_release_head_state()" does, while "skb_free_head()" doesn't. ah great.. thanks for info, will check jirka > > > > > and that kprobe address is what we return in helper: > > > > BPF_CALL_1(bpf_get_func_ip_kprobe, struct pt_regs *, regs) > > { > > struct kprobe *kp = kprobe_running(); > > > > return kp ? (uintptr_t)kp->addr : 0; > > } > > > > so the adjustment would work only for address at function entry, but > > would be wrong for address within the function > > > > perhaps we could add flag to kprobe to indicate the addr adjustment > > was done and use it in helper > > > > but that's why I thought I'd keep bpf_get_func_ip_kprobe as it and > > leave it up to user > > > > kprobe_multi and trampolines are different, because they can be > > only at the function entry, so we can adjust the ip properly > > > > jirka
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 02:48:46PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 02:09:54PM +0300, Martynas Pumputis wrote: > > > > > > On 7/18/22 00:43, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 12:16:35AM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 10:29:17PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 12:04 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > The kprobe can be placed anywhere and user must be aware > > > > > > of the underlying instructions. Therefore fixing just > > > > > > the bpf program to 'fix' the address to match the actual > > > > > > function address when CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT is enabled. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c | 7 +++++-- > > > > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > > > > > > index a587aeca5ae0..220d56b7c1dc 100644 > > > > > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > > > > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c > > > > > > @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ > > > > > > #include <linux/bpf.h> > > > > > > #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h> > > > > > > #include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h> > > > > > > +#include <stdbool.h> > > > > > > > > > > > > char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL"; > > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -13,6 +14,8 @@ extern const void bpf_modify_return_test __ksym; > > > > > > extern const void bpf_fentry_test6 __ksym; > > > > > > extern const void bpf_fentry_test7 __ksym; > > > > > > > > > > > > +extern bool CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT __kconfig __weak; > > > > > > + > > > > > > __u64 test1_result = 0; > > > > > > SEC("fentry/bpf_fentry_test1") > > > > > > int BPF_PROG(test1, int a) > > > > > > @@ -37,7 +40,7 @@ __u64 test3_result = 0; > > > > > > SEC("kprobe/bpf_fentry_test3") > > > > > > int test3(struct pt_regs *ctx) > > > > > > { > > > > > > - __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx); > > > > > > + __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx) - (CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT ? 4 : 0); > > > > > > > > > > so for kprobe bpf_get_func_ip() gets an address with 5 byte > > > > > compensation for `call __fentry__`, but not for endr? Why can't we > > > > > compensate for endbr inside the kernel code as well? I'd imagine we > > > > > either do no compensation (and thus we get &bpf_fentry_test3+5 or > > > > > &bpf_fentry_test3+9, depending on CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT) or full > > > > > compensation (and thus always get &bpf_fentry_test3), but this > > > > > in-between solution seems to be the worst of both worlds?... > > > > > > > > hm rigth, I guess we should be able to do that in bpf_get_func_ip, > > > > I'll check > > > > > > sorry for late follow up.. > > > > > > so the problem is that you can place kprobe anywhere in the function > > > (on instruction boundary) but the IBT adjustment of kprobe address is > > > made only if it's at the function entry and there's endbr instruction > > > > To add more fun to the issue, not all non-inlined functions get endbr64. For > > example "skb_release_head_state()" does, while "skb_free_head()" doesn't. > > ah great.. thanks for info, will check I checked with Peter and yes the endbr does not need to be there <peterz> IBT is 'Indirect Branch Tracking' ENDBR needs to be at the target for "JMP *%reg" and "CALL *%reg" <peterz> direct call/jmp don't need anything specal so we will need to hold the +4 info somewhere for each address and use that in get_func_ip helper or perhaps we could read previous instruction and check if the previous instruction is endbr with check like: if (is_endbr(*(u32 *)(addr - 4))) addr -= 4 jirka
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c index a587aeca5ae0..220d56b7c1dc 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ #include <linux/bpf.h> #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h> #include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h> +#include <stdbool.h> char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL"; @@ -13,6 +14,8 @@ extern const void bpf_modify_return_test __ksym; extern const void bpf_fentry_test6 __ksym; extern const void bpf_fentry_test7 __ksym; +extern bool CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT __kconfig __weak; + __u64 test1_result = 0; SEC("fentry/bpf_fentry_test1") int BPF_PROG(test1, int a) @@ -37,7 +40,7 @@ __u64 test3_result = 0; SEC("kprobe/bpf_fentry_test3") int test3(struct pt_regs *ctx) { - __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx); + __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx) - (CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT ? 4 : 0); test3_result = (const void *) addr == &bpf_fentry_test3; return 0; @@ -47,7 +50,7 @@ __u64 test4_result = 0; SEC("kretprobe/bpf_fentry_test4") int BPF_KRETPROBE(test4) { - __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx); + __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx) - (CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT ? 4 : 0); test4_result = (const void *) addr == &bpf_fentry_test4; return 0;
The kprobe can be placed anywhere and user must be aware of the underlying instructions. Therefore fixing just the bpf program to 'fix' the address to match the actual function address when CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT is enabled. Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c | 7 +++++-- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)