linux-kernel - Re: [linux-next-20250324]/tool/bpf/bpftool fails to complie on linux-next-20250324

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: <CAP4=nvTUWvnZvcBhn0dcUQueZNuOFY1XqTeU5N3FEjNmj4yHDA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 16:09:06 +0100
From: Tomas Glozar <tglozar@...hat.com>
To: Quentin Monnet <qmo@...nel.org>
Cc: Saket Kumar Bhaskar <skb99@...ux.ibm.com>, Venkat Rao Bagalkote <venkat88@...ux.ibm.com>, 
	Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, 
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, 
	jkacur@...hat.com, lgoncalv@...hat.com, gmonaco@...hat.com, 
	williams@...hat.com, rostedt@...dmis.org
Subject: Re: [linux-next-20250324]/tool/bpf/bpftool fails to complie on linux-next-20250324

út 25. 3. 2025 v 15:59 odesílatel Tomas Glozar <tglozar@...hat.com> napsal:
> Shouldn't the selftests always test the in-tree bpftool instead of the
> system one? Let's say there is a stray BPFTOOL environmental variable.
> In that case, the tests will give incorrect, possibly false negative
> results, if the user is expecting selftests to test what is in the
> kernel tree. If it is intended to also be able to test with another
> version of bpftool, we can work around the problem by removing the
> BPFTOOL definition from tools/scripts/Makefile.include and exporting
> it from the rtla Makefiles instead, to make sure the feature tests see
> it. The problem with that is, obviously, that future users of the
> bpftool feature check would have to do the same, or they would always
> fail, unless the user sets BPFTOOL as an environment variable
> themselves.

Or the selftests and other users could use another variable, like
BPFTOOL_TEST or BPFTOOL_INTERNAL. Not sure what you BPF folks think
about that. I believe assuming BPFTOOL refers to the system bpftool
(just like it does for all the other tools) is quite reasonable.

Tomas