Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cover.1652772731.git.esyr@redhat.com> <6ef675aeeea442fa8fc168cd1cb4e4e474f65a3f.1652772731.git.esyr@redhat.com>
 <YoNnAgDsIWef82is@krava> <20220517123050.GA25149@asgard.redhat.com>
 <YoP/eEMqAn3sVFXf@krava> <7c5e64f2-f2cf-61b7-9231-fc267bf0f2d8@fb.com>
 <YoTXiAk1EpZ0rLKE@krava> <20220518123022.GA5425@asgard.redhat.com>
 <CAEf4BzbRYT4ykpxzXKGQ03REoVRKm_q8=oVEVCXfE+4zVDb=8A@mail.gmail.com> <20220519173359.GA7786@asgard.redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220519173359.GA7786@asgard.redhat.com>
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 20 May 2022 16:16:57 -0700
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzYCU-jz9aks3q4Y+nvjkTyoqnW4CAL6KujioLOoAiJ3YA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 4/4] bpf_trace: pass array of u64 values in kprobe_multi.addrs
To:     Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@redhat.com>
Cc:     Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 10:34 AM Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 04:48:59PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > Not sure how you can do that without having extra test_progs variant
> > that's running in compat mode?
>
> I think, all bpf selftests are to be run in compat mode as well,
> now is a good time to enable this as any.
>

It's going to add a noticeable delay to CI runs, which is bad. Until
we have everything set up to run test_progs flavors in parallel,
adding compat flavor is not an option.