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;
Feedback-ID: id4a34324:Fastmail
Date:   Sun, 3 Jul 2022 09:54:48 -0700
From:   Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@gmail.com>
Cc:     sedat.dilek@gmail.com, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, jolsa@kernel.org,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com>,
        linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [perf-tools] Build-error in tools/perf/util/annotate.c with
 LLVM-14
Message-ID: <20220703165448.7d2akxawzdvqigat@awork3.anarazel.de>
References: <CA+icZUVVXq0Mh8=QuopF0tMZyZ0Tn8AiKEZoA3jfP47Q8B=x2A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+icZUW3VrDC8J4MnNb1H3nGYQggBwY4zOoaJkzSsNj7xKDvyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+icZUVcCMCGEaxytyJd_-Ur-Ey_gWyXx=tApo-SVUqbX_bhUA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+icZUVpr8ZeOKCj4zMMqbFT013KJz2T1csvXg+VSkdvJH1Ubw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1496A989-23D2-474D-B941-BA2D74761A7E@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1496A989-23D2-474D-B941-BA2D74761A7E@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On 2022-07-03 10:54:45 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> That series should be split a bit further, so that the
> new features test is in a separate patch, i.e. I don't process bpftool patches, but can process the feature test and the tools/perf part.

Ok, will split it further. Should I do

1) feature test
2) introduce compat header header
3) use feature test, use header in perf/
4) use feature test, use header in bpf/

Or should 3, 4 be split to separately introduce the feature test and use of
the compat header?

Greetings,

Andres Freund