[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANiq72khCDjCVbU=t+vpR+EfJucNBpYhZkW2VVjnXbD9S77C0A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 20:47:53 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kbuild: pahole-version: avoid errors if executing fails
On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 4:00 PM Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu> wrote:
>
> Do we have to catch all possibilities? Then, what about this:
Something like that sounds good to me too -- we do something similar
in `rust_is_available.sh`. We also have a `1` in the beginning of
(most of) the `sed` commands there to check only the first line.
I guess it depends on whether Masahiro thinks the extra
checks/complexity is worth it. Here I was aiming to catch the case he
reported, i.e. non-successful programs.
Cheers,
Miguel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists