linux-kernel - Re: tools build: Unused function, incomplete rename

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20150918194852.GY11551@kernel.org>
Date:	Fri, 18 Sep 2015 16:48:52 -0300
From:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
	Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: tools build: Unused function, incomplete rename

Em Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 04:38:42PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 04:23:34PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > 	While trying to figure out why the bpf feature test is always
> > triggering the display of the "Auto-detecting system features" I noticed
> > this pattern:
 
> Another problem, this time in how tools/lib/bpf/ specifies which
> features to test for and which ones should have the feature detection
> shown, does the following patch makes sense? I think it does because
> FEATURE_TESTS looks like the ones that will be tested, and
> FEATURE_DISPLAY the ones that will appear...:

So the original problem seems to be this:

  [acme@...icio linux]$ cat /tmp/build/perf/FEATURE-DUMP 
  feature-libelf(1) feature-libelf-getphdrnum(1) feature-libelf-mmap(1) feature-bpf(1)

This is the content at the end of a build, i.e. the FEATURE-DUMP for
tools/lib/ebpf/ usage of the feature detection system, since
tools/perf/ uses the same file and selects a different set of
features.

I think that ebpf should use a separate directory, inside $(OUTPUT),
this way we would have $(OUTPUT)/FEATURE-DUMP for perf and
$(OUTPUT)/bpf/FEATURE-DUMP for ebpf.

- Arnaldo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/