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;
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Mar 30 (bpf)
To:     KP Singh <kpsingh@chromium.org>
Cc:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20200330204307.669bbb4d@canb.auug.org.au>
 <86f7031a-57c6-5d50-2788-ae0e06a7c138@infradead.org>
 <d5b4bd95-7ef9-58cb-1955-900e6edb2467@iogearbox.net>
 <CACYkzJ72Uy9mnenO04OJaKH=Bk4ZENKJb9yw6i+EhJUa+ygngQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200330180538.GA180081@google.com>
From:   Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Message-ID: <08026861-d198-add1-feb8-c43f2e006cb6@infradead.org>
Date:   Mon, 30 Mar 2020 11:15:44 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200330180538.GA180081@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 3/30/20 11:05 AM, KP Singh wrote:
> On 30-Mar 19:54, KP Singh wrote:
> 
> So, it looks like bpf_tracing_func_proto is only defined when
> CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is set:
> 
>         obj-$(CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS) += bpf_trace.o
> 
> We have a few options:
> 
> * Add a __weak symbol for bpf_tracing_func_proto which we have done in
>   the past for similar issues. This however, does not make much sense,
>   as CONFIG_BPF_LSM cannot really do much without its helpers.
> * Make CONFIG_BPF_LSM depend on CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS, this should solve
>   it, but not for this particular Kconfig that was generated. Randy,
>   I am assuming if we add the dependency, this particular Kconfig
>   won't be generated.

Hi KP,
That sounds reasonable.

Thanks.

> 
> I am assuming this patch now needs to be sent for "bpf" and not
> "bpf-next" as the merge window has opened?
> 
> - KP
> 
>> Thanks for adding me Daniel, taking a look.
>>
>> - KP
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 7:25 PM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> [Cc KP, ptal]
>>>
>>> On 3/30/20 7:15 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>>> On 3/30/20 2:43 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> The merge window has opened, so please do not add any material for the
>>>>> next release into your linux-next included trees/branches until after
>>>>> the merge window closes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Changes since 20200327:
>>>>
>>>> (note: linux-next is based on linux 5.6-rc7)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> on i386:
>>>>
>>>> ld: kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.o:(.rodata+0x0): undefined reference to `bpf_tracing_func_proto'
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Full randconfig file is attached.


-- 
~Randy