[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <385ce274-712f-e1fb-8de6-f4441728c225@iogearbox.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2022 00:07:15 +0100
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
Cc: KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Artem Savkov <asavkov@...hat.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, ykaliuta@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: fix build-id for
liburandom_read.so
On 11/4/22 11:58 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 10:38 AM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Artem,
>>
>> On 11/4/22 2:29 PM, KP Singh wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 10:41 AM Artem Savkov <asavkov@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> lld produces "fast" style build-ids by default, which is inconsistent
>>>> with ld's "sha1" style. Explicitly specify build-id style to be "sha1"
>>>> when linking liburandom_read.so the same way it is already done for
>>>> urandom_read.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Artem Savkov <asavkov@...hat.com>
>>>
>>> Acked-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>
>>>
>>> This was done in
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200922232140.1994390-1-morbo@google.com
>>
>> When you say "fix", does it actually fix a failing test case or is it more
>> of a cleanup to align liburandom_read build with urandom_read? From glancing
>> at the code, we only check build id for urandom_read.
>
> I reworded the subject to "selftests/bpf: Use consistent build-id type
> for liburandom_read.so" and pushed. Thanks!
Ack, sgtm!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists