We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
# ./pwru --backend kprobe --filter-trace-tc --filter-trace-xdp --filter-func '.*icmp.*' icmp 2025/01/15 14:04:34 Attaching tc-bpf progs... 2025/01/15 14:04:34 Attaching xdp progs... 2025/01/15 14:04:34 failed to trace XDP progs: failed to trace bpf progs: failed to load objects: using replacement map .bss: Flags: 1024 changed to 0: map spec is incompatible with existing map
I add a log to check .bss flags:
.bss
2025/01/15 14:36:35 spec .bss flags: 0x0, .bss map flags: 0x400
0x400 is BPF_F_MMAPABLE.
0x400
/* Enable memory-mapping BPF map */ BPF_F_MMAPABLE = (1U << 10),
It seems this flag is set by go-ebpf v0.17.1.
I'll fix it asap.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.
# ./pwru --backend kprobe --filter-trace-tc --filter-trace-xdp --filter-func '.*icmp.*' icmp 2025/01/15 14:04:34 Attaching tc-bpf progs... 2025/01/15 14:04:34 Attaching xdp progs... 2025/01/15 14:04:34 failed to trace XDP progs: failed to trace bpf progs: failed to load objects: using replacement map .bss: Flags: 1024 changed to 0: map spec is incompatible with existing map
I add a log to check
.bss
flags:0x400
is BPF_F_MMAPABLE.It seems this flag is set by go-ebpf v0.17.1.
I'll fix it asap.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: