linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf build: Support passing extra Clang options via EXTRA_BPF

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: <20251020135012.GG281971@e132581.arm.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2025 14:50:12 +0100
From: Leo Yan <leo.yan@....com>
To: hupu <hupu.gm@...il.com>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, acme@...nel.org,
	adrian.hunter@...el.com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
	irogers@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org, justinstitt@...gle.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
	mark.rutland@....com, mingo@...hat.com, morbo@...gle.com,
	nathan@...nel.org, nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com,
	peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf build: Support passing extra Clang options via
 EXTRA_BPF_FLAGS

Hi hupu,

On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 08:51:52PM +0800, hupu wrote:

[...]

> > To be clear, now we are not talking cross build for perf program or any
> > targeting a CPU arch, it is a build failure for eBPF program.
> >
> 
> I’d like to clarify the background and scenario once more:
> I’m building an SDK that includes a cross-compilation toolchain for
> the target architecture along with a copy of the kernel source tree.

I am not preventing to use toolchains in you mentioned SDK.  I just
prefer to give priority the headers provided by the kernel source.

Seems to me, a more reasonable series would be:

 - Fix the eBPF program build with using self-contained headers;
 - Extend to support external headers.

Thanks,
Leo