Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20211026120132.613201817@infradead.org> <CAADnVQJaiHWWnVcaRN43DcNgqktgKs3i1P3uz4Qm8kN7bvPCCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <YXhMv6rENfn/zsaj@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
In-Reply-To: <YXhMv6rENfn/zsaj@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Oct 2021 13:00:04 -0700
Message-ID: <CAADnVQ+w_ww3ZR_bJVEU-PxWusT569y0biLNi=GZJNpKqFzNLA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/16] x86: Rewrite the retpoline rewrite logic
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 11:45 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 11:26:57AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>
> > It's a merge conflict. The patchset failed to apply to both bpf and
> > bpf-next trees:
>
> Figures :/ I suspect it relies on tip/objtool/core at the very least and
> possibly some of the x86 trees as well.
>
> I can locally merge tip/master with bpf, but getting a CI to do that
> might be tricky.

We have an ability in CI to supply few additional patches on top bpf/bpf-next
trees, but that's usually done for the cases where we've merged a fix into
one tree, but it's needed in both while bpf->net->linus->net-next->bpf-next
circle is still pending.

Does tip/objtool/core dependency relevant for this set?
Can you rebase the current set on top of bpf-next and send it to the list
just to get CI to run it? We won't be merging it into bpf-next, of course.
I'm mainly interested in seeing all that additional tests passing that
we have in bpf-next.