[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6a960374-0cd2-4de9-8fc6-c8fe21097b6b@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 11:29:59 +0000
From: Quentin Monnet <qmo@...nel.org>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, Björn Töpel
<bjorn@...nel.org>
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@...osinc.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Björn Töpel
<bjorn@...osinc.com>, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Abdurachmanov <davidlt@...osinc.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools: Override makefile ARCH variable if defined, but
empty
2024-11-20 22:04 UTC-0800 ~ Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 02:25:22PM +0100, Björn Töpel wrote:
>> Björn Töpel <bjorn@...nel.org> writes:
>>
>>> From: Björn Töpel <bjorn@...osinc.com>
>>>
>>> There are a number of tools (bpftool, selftests), that require a
>>> "bootstrap" build. Here, a bootstrap build is a build host variant of
>>> a target. E.g., assume that you're performing a bpftool cross-build on
>>> x86 to riscv, a bootstrap build would then be an x86 variant of
>>> bpftool. The typical way to perform the host build variant, is to pass
>>> "ARCH=" in a sub-make. However, if a variable has been set with a
>>> command argument, then ordinary assignments in the makefile are
>>> ignored.
>>>
>>> This side-effect results in that ARCH, and variables depending on ARCH
>>> are not set.
>>>
>>> Workaround by overriding ARCH to the host arch, if ARCH is empty.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 8859b0da5aac ("tools/bpftool: Fix cross-build")
>>> Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@...osinc.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Acked-by: Quentin Monnet <qmo@...nel.org>
>> Arnaldo/Palmer/Quentin:
>>
>> A bit unsure what tree this patch should go. It's very important for the
>> RISC-V builds, so maybe via Palmer's RISC-V tree?
>
> I think it'd be best to route this through the bpf tree as it seems the
> main target is bpftool. But given the size and the scope of the change,
> it should be fine with perf-tools or RISC-V tree.
The bpf tree would make sense to me as well (but I don't merge patches
myself; let me Cc BPF maintainers).
Quentin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists