Messages in this thread | | | From | Sedat Dilek <> | Date | Sat, 27 Mar 2021 12:50:55 +0100 | Subject | Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree |
| |
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 2:11 PM Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 09:57:43AM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote: > > The commit b90829704780 "bpf: Use NOP_ATOMIC5 instead of > > emit_nops(&prog, 5) for BPF_TRAMP_F_CALL_ORIG" is now in Linus Git > > (see [1]). > > > > Where will Stephen's fixup-patch be carried? > > Linux-next? > > net-next? > > <tip.git#x86/cpu>? > > I guess we'll resolve it on our end and pick up sfr's patch, most > likely. > > Thanks for letting me know. >
Sounds good to me.
So you need:
$ grep CONFIG_BPF_JIT= .config 1795:CONFIG_BPF_JIT=y
$ git grep CONFIG_BPF_JIT arch/x86/net/Makefile arch/x86/net/Makefile: obj-$(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) += bpf_jit_comp32.o arch/x86/net/Makefile: obj-$(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) += bpf_jit_comp.o
I wonder why Stephen's fixup-patch was not carried in recent Linux-next releases. Wild speculation - no random-config with x86(-64) plus CONFIG_BPF_JIT=y?
Anyway, I integrated Stephen's fixup-patch into my custom patchset.
$ git log --oneline --author="Stephen Rothwell" v5.12-rc4.. 600417efac59 (for-5.12/x86-cpu-20210315-net-bpf-sfr) x86: fix up for "bpf: Use NOP_ATOMIC5 instead of emit_nops(&prog, 5) for BPF_TRAMP_F_CALL_ORIG"
Feel free to add my:
Tested-by: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> # LLVM/Clang v12.0.0-rc3 (x86-64)
- Sedat -
| |