Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= <toke@redhat.com>
To:     Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>,
        Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org,
        "open list\:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 00/10] tools: Use consistent libbpf include paths everywhere
In-Reply-To: <CAEf4Bza+dNoD7HbVQGtXBq=raz4DQg0yTShKZHRbCo+zHYfoSA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <157909756858.1192265.6657542187065456112.stgit@toke.dk> <CAEf4Bza+dNoD7HbVQGtXBq=raz4DQg0yTShKZHRbCo+zHYfoSA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Jan 2020 23:10:28 +0100
Message-ID: <87o8v4tlpn.fsf@toke.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 6:13 AM Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen <toke@re=
dhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> The recent commit 6910d7d3867a ("selftests/bpf: Ensure bpf_helper_defs.h=
 are
>> taken from selftests dir") broke compilation against libbpf if it is ins=
talled
>> on the system, and $INCLUDEDIR/bpf is not in the include path.
>>
>> Since having the bpf/ subdir of $INCLUDEDIR in the include path has neve=
r been a
>> requirement for building against libbpf before, this needs to be fixed. =
One
>> option is to just revert the offending commit and figure out a different=
 way to
>> achieve what it aims for. However, this series takes a different approac=
h:
>> Changing all in-tree users of libbpf to consistently use a bpf/ prefix in
>> #include directives for header files from libbpf.
>>
>> This turns out to be a somewhat invasive change in the number of files t=
ouched;
>> however, the actual changes to files are fairly trivial (most of them ar=
e simply
>> made with 'sed'). Also, this approach has the advantage that it makes ex=
ternal
>> and internal users consistent with each other, and ensures no future cha=
nges
>> breaks things in the same way as the commit referenced above.
>>
>> The series is split to make the change for one tool subdir at a time, wh=
ile
>> trying not to break the build along the way. It is structured like this:
>>
>> - Patch 1-2: Trivial fixes to Makefiles for issues I discovered while ch=
anging
>>   the include paths.
>>
>> - Patch 3-7: Change the include directives to use the bpf/ prefix, and u=
pdates
>>   Makefiles to make sure tools/lib/ is part of the include path, but wit=
hout
>>   removing tools/lib/bpf
>>
>> - Patch 8: Change the bpf_helpers file in libbpf itself to use the bpf/ =
prefix
>>   when including (the original source of breakage).
>>
>> - Patch 9-10: Remove tools/lib/bpf from include paths to make sure we do=
n't
>>   inadvertently re-introduce includes without the bpf/ prefix.
>>
>> ---
>
> Thanks, Toke, for this clean up! I tested it locally for my set up:
> runqslower, bpftool, libbpf, and selftests all build fine, so it looks
> good. My only concern is with selftests/bpf Makefile, we shouldn't
> build anything outside of selftests/bpf. Let's fix that. Thanks!

Great, thanks for testing! I'll fix up your comments (and Alexei's) and
submit another version tomorrow.

-Toke