Hi all,
After merging the seccomp tree, today's linux-next build (native perf)
failed like this:
make[3]: *** No rule to make target '/home/sfr/next/perf/bench/sched-seccomp-notify.o', needed by '/home/sfr/next/perf/bench/perf-in.o'. Stop.
make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
make[2]: *** [/home/sfr/next/next/tools/build/Makefile.build:140: bench] Error 2
make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
make[1]: *** [Makefile.perf:682: /home/sfr/next/perf/perf-in.o] Error 2
make: *** [Makefile.perf:242: sub-make] Error 2
Command exited with non-zero status 2
Presumably caused by commit
df614e369b5c ("perf/benchmark: add a new benchmark for seccom_unotify")
This is a native build of perf on a PowerPC 46 bit LE host.
I have used the seccomp tree from next-20230628 for today.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 10:27:09PM -0700, Andrei Vagin wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 7:50 PM Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After merging the seccomp tree, today's linux-next build (native perf)
> > failed like this:
> >
> > make[3]: *** No rule to make target '/home/sfr/next/perf/bench/sched-seccomp-notify.o', needed by '/home/sfr/next/perf/bench/perf-in.o'. Stop.
> > make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> > make[2]: *** [/home/sfr/next/next/tools/build/Makefile.build:140: bench] Error 2
> > make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> > make[1]: *** [Makefile.perf:682: /home/sfr/next/perf/perf-in.o] Error 2
> > make: *** [Makefile.perf:242: sub-make] Error 2
> > Command exited with non-zero status 2
> >
> > Presumably caused by commit
> >
> > df614e369b5c ("perf/benchmark: add a new benchmark for seccom_unotify")
>
> tools/perf/bench/sched-seccomp-notify.c should be in this commit too.
> Probably something went wrong when the patch was applied. I've checked
> that the patch contains this file:
>
> https://patchew.org/linux/[email protected]/[email protected]/
>
> Kees, could you take a look at this?
Yeah, I had to fix the merge and it looks like I missed the needed "git
add", yet it compiled for me locally. Ugh. I will get this fixed.
--
Kees Cook
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 7:50 PM Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the seccomp tree, today's linux-next build (native perf)
> failed like this:
>
> make[3]: *** No rule to make target '/home/sfr/next/perf/bench/sched-seccomp-notify.o', needed by '/home/sfr/next/perf/bench/perf-in.o'. Stop.
> make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> make[2]: *** [/home/sfr/next/next/tools/build/Makefile.build:140: bench] Error 2
> make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> make[1]: *** [Makefile.perf:682: /home/sfr/next/perf/perf-in.o] Error 2
> make: *** [Makefile.perf:242: sub-make] Error 2
> Command exited with non-zero status 2
>
> Presumably caused by commit
>
> df614e369b5c ("perf/benchmark: add a new benchmark for seccom_unotify")
tools/perf/bench/sched-seccomp-notify.c should be in this commit too.
Probably something went wrong when the patch was applied. I've checked
that the patch contains this file:
https://patchew.org/linux/[email protected]/[email protected]/
Kees, could you take a look at this?
>
> This is a native build of perf on a PowerPC 46 bit LE host.
>
> I have used the seccomp tree from next-20230628 for today.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 10:27:09PM -0700, Andrei Vagin wrote:
> Probably something went wrong when the patch was applied. I've checked
> that the patch contains this file:
>
> https://patchew.org/linux/[email protected]/[email protected]/
>
> Kees, could you take a look at this?
Hmm, it seems something else went wrong too, due to:
616b14b47a86 ("perf build: Conditionally define NDEBUG")
I've added "#undef NDEBUG" to the file too.
--
Kees Cook
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 10:58 PM Kees Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 10:27:09PM -0700, Andrei Vagin wrote:
> > Probably something went wrong when the patch was applied. I've checked
> > that the patch contains this file:
> >
> > https://patchew.org/linux/[email protected]/[email protected]/
> >
> > Kees, could you take a look at this?
>
> Hmm, it seems something else went wrong too, due to:
> 616b14b47a86 ("perf build: Conditionally define NDEBUG")
>
> I've added "#undef NDEBUG" to the file too.
I have sent the patch to address this problem:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/T/#u
Thanks,
Andrei