[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzZQnX7DWBZTKqtk5v0apRoKy4rUMKTm5GXrbQc+q35a+g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:29:49 -0700
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 15/17] selftests/bpf: add function linking selftest
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 7:35 PM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 5:51 PM Yonghong Song <yhs@...com> wrote:
> > > +
> > > +/* weak and shared between two files */
> > > +const volatile int my_tid __weak = 0;
> > > +const volatile long syscall_id __weak = 0;
> >
> > Since the new compiler (llvm13) is recommended for this patch set.
> > We can simplify the above two definition with
> > int my_tid __weak;
> > long syscall_id __weak;
> > The same for the other file.
> >
> > But I am also okay with the current form
> > to *satisfy* llvm10 some people may still use.
>
> The test won't work with anything, but the latest llvm trunk,
> so " = 0" is useless.
> Let's remove it.
> Especially from the tests that rely on the latest llvm.
> No one can backport the latest llvm BPF backend to llvm10 front-end.
Sure, I'll drop = 0, just a habit by now.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists