Currently, BPF only contains three relocations: R_BPF_NONE for no relocation R_BPF_64_64 for LD_imm64 and normal 64-bit data relocation R_BPF_64_32 for call insn and normal 32-bit data relocation Also .BTF and .BTF.ext sections contain symbols in allocated program and data sections. These two sections reserved 32bit space to hold the offset relative to the symbol's section. LLVM JIT tries to resolve these symbols with an actual 64bit address and it won't work since we only have 32bit space. So we used R_BPF_NONE for such relocations. This all works fine until when we try to do linking of multiple objects. . R_BPF_64_64 handling of LD_imm64 vs. normal 64-bit data is different, so target->relocate() needs more context to do a correct job. . The same for R_BPF_64_32. . Since relocations in .BTF and .BTF.ext are set to none, they will not be relocated properly. This patch intends to address this issue by adding additional relocation kinds: R_BPF_64_LD64 for LD_imm64 relocation R_BPF_64_PC32 for call insn relocation R_BPF_64_ALLOC32 for .BTF and .BTF.ext style relocations. R_BPF_64_64 and R_BPF_64_32 are used for 64- and 32-bit data relocations. The elfutils already used them for dwarf. https://sourceware.org/git/?p=elfutils.git;a=blob;f=backends/bpf_reloc.def This patch does not change that. So elfutils does not need change even with this patch. I also removed handling of FK_SecRel_4 Fixup Kind as it seems there is no bpf insn which could trigger this fixup kind.

Currently, BPF only contains three relocations: R_BPF_NONE for no relocation R_BPF_64_64 for LD_imm64 and normal 64-bit data relocation R_BPF_64_32 for call insn and normal 32-bit data relocation Also .BTF and .BTF.ext sections contain symbols in allocated program and data sections. These two sections reserved 32bit space to hold the offset relative to the symbol's section. LLVM JIT tries to resolve these symbols with an actual 64bit address and it won't work since we only have 32bit space. Also, we don't really want JIT to do relocatin for such cases. So we used R_BPF_NONE for such relocations. This all works fine until when we try to do linking of multiple objects. . R_BPF_64_64 handling of LD_imm64 vs. normal 64-bit data is different, so target->relocate() needs more context to do a correct job. . The same for R_BPF_64_32. . Since relocations in .BTF and .BTF.ext are set to none, they will not be relocated properly. This patch intends to address this issue by adding additional relocation kinds: R_BPF_64_LD64 for LD_imm64 relocation R_BPF_64_PC32 for call insn relocation R_BPF_64_ALLOC32 for .BTF and .BTF.ext style relocations. R_BPF_64_64 and R_BPF_64_32 are used for 64- and 32-bit data relocations. The elfutils already used them for dwarf. https://sourceware.org/git/?p=elfutils.git;a=blob;f=backends/bpf_reloc.def This patch does not change that. So elfutils does not need change even with this patch. I also removed handling of FK_SecRel_4 Fixup Kind as it seems there is no bpf insn which could trigger this fixup kind.

Currently, BPF only contains three relocations: R_BPF_NONE for no relocation R_BPF_64_64 for LD_imm64 and normal 64-bit data relocation R_BPF_64_32 for call insn and normal 32-bit data relocation Also .BTF and .BTF.ext sections contain symbols in allocated program and data sections. These two sections reserved 32bit space to hold the offset relative to the symbol's section. LLVM JIT tries to resolve these symbols with an actual 64bit address and it won't work since we only have 32bit space. Also, we don't really want JIT to do relocatin for such cases. So we used R_BPF_NONE for such relocations. This all works fine until when we try to do linking of multiple objects. . R_BPF_64_64 handling of LD_imm64 vs. normal 64-bit data is different, so target->relocate() needs more context to do a correct job. . The same for R_BPF_64_32. . Since relocations in .BTF and .BTF.ext are set to none, they will not be relocated properly. This patch intends to address this issue by adding additional relocation kinds: R_BPF_64_LD64 for LD_imm64 relocation R_BPF_64_PC32 for call insn relocation R_BPF_64_ALLOC32 for .BTF and .BTF.ext style relocations. R_BPF_64_64 and R_BPF_64_32 are used for 64- and 32-bit data relocations. The elfutils already used them for dwarf. https://sourceware.org/git/?p=elfutils.git;a=blob;f=backends/bpf_reloc.def This patch does not change that. So elfutils does not need change even with this patch. I also removed handling of FK_SecRel_4 Fixup Kind as it seems there is no bpf insn which could trigger this fixup kind.