netdev - Re: [PATCH] libbpf: Use PRIu64 for sym->st_value to fix build on 32-bit arches

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: <20191127193925.GC4063@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 27 Nov 2019 16:39:25 -0300
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@...il.com>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc:     Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>,
        Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Quentin Monnet <quentin.monnet@...ronome.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libbpf: Use PRIu64 for sym->st_value to fix build on
 32-bit arches

Em Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 10:55:31AM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov escreveu:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 10:45 AM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
> <acme@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Em Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 08:39:28AM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov escreveu:
> > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 5:45 AM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
> > > <acme@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Another fix I'm carrying in my perf/core branch,
> >
> > > Why in perf/core?
> > > I very much prefer all libbpf patches to go via normal route via bpf/net trees.
> > > We had enough conflicts in this merge window. Let's avoid them.
> >
> > Humm, if we both carry the same patch the merge process can do its magic
> > and nobody gets hurt? Besides these are really minor things, no?
> 
> I thought so too, but learned the hard lesson recently.
> We should try to avoid that as much as possible.
> Andrii's is fixing stuff in the same lines:
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1201344/
> these two patches will likely conflict. I'd rather have them both in bpf tree.
> What is the value for this patch in perf tree?
> To fix the build on 32-bit arches, right?
> But how urgent is it? Can you wait few days until this one and other
> libbpf fixes
> land via bpf/net trees?

Ok, I'll add a note to the pull request report about where the perf
build is clean in all containers because I added these two patches, but
that they'll go via the bpf tree, as soon as that gets merged, the
problem will go away.

And I wasn't strictly defending that I should carry this in perf/core,
just said I was, to fix something minor that I found while doing my
usual testing, patch was posted, you got notified and got the patch,
I'll remove it from perf/core now since you stated that it'll eventually
land upstream.

Thanks,

- Arnaldo