Optional struct_ops maps are defined using question mark at the start
of the section name, e.g.:
SEC("?.struct_ops")
struct test_ops optional_map = { ... };
This commit teaches libbpf to detect if kernel allows '?' prefix
in datasec names, and if it doesn't then to rewrite such names
by replacing '?' with '_', e.g.:
DATASEC ?.struct_ops -> DATASEC _.struct_ops
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240306104529.6453-13-eddyz87@gmail.com
Adjust feature probing callbacks to take into account optional token_fd.
In unprivileged contexts, some feature detectors would fail to detect
kernel support just because BPF program, BPF map, or BTF object can't be
loaded due to privileged nature of those operations. So when BPF object
is loaded with BPF token, this token should be used for feature probing.
This patch is setting support for this scenario, but we don't yet pass
non-zero token FD. This will be added in the next patch.
We also switched BPF cookie detector from using kprobe program to
tracepoint one, as tracepoint is somewhat less dangerous BPF program
type and has higher likelihood of being allowed through BPF token in the
future. This change has no effect on detection behavior.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240124022127.2379740-25-andrii@kernel.org
