[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CADxym3bDOcwi9Qgaibu8TeER8ORtvX0-6ernqfLBTvd1Bo+5xA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 11:03:35 +0800
From: Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@...il.com>
To: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>
Cc: Menglong Dong <menglong.dong@...ux.dev>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>, ast@...nel.org,
davem@...emloft.net, dsahern@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
andrii@...nel.org, martin.lau@...ux.dev, song@...nel.org,
yonghong.song@...ux.dev, john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org,
sdf@...ichev.me, haoluo@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org,
hpa@...or.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: test the jited inline of bpf_get_current_task
On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 9:32 AM Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2026-01-21 at 09:28 +0800, Menglong Dong wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > Do you mean that the CI of arm64 doesn't use LLVM for the selftests?
> > I noted that. I found that there are other similar "__jited" testings for
> > arm64, is there anything we can do?
> >
> > PS: I tested the arm64 locally, and it works fine.
> >
> > >
> > > So we should do something about silently skipped tests at least...
> >
> > Like a warning?
>
> Yes, probably llvm-devel or libs dependency is missing,
> hence jit related selftests are skipped. Same thing for x86.
> Discussed with Andrii making llvm an opt-out dependency:
> fail selftests compilation if libraries are not found and SKIP_LLVM is not set.
Sounds nice. People may not be aware of the LLVM dependence
sometimes.
So is there anything I can do in this series?
Thanks!
Menglong Dong
> We plan to address CI config issue tomorrow.
>
> [...]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists