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: <20230320005258.1428043-1-sashal@kernel.org> <20230320005258.1428043-8-sashal@kernel.org>
 <CAN+4W8g6AcQQWe7rrBVOFYoqeQA-1VbUP_W7DPS3q0k-czOLfg@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZBiAPngOtzSwDhFz@kroah.com> <CAN+4W8jAyJTdFL=tgp3wCpYAjGOs5ggo6vyOg8PbaW+tJP8TKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN+4W8j5qe6p3YV90g-E0VhV7AmYyAvt0z50dfDSombbGghkww@mail.gmail.com>
 <2023041100-oblong-enamel-5893@gregkh> <CAN+4W8hmSgbb-wO4da4A=6B4y0oSjvUTTVia_0PpUXShP4NX4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <2023052435-xbox-dislike-0ab2@gregkh> <CAN+4W8iMcwwVjmSekZ9txzZNxOZ0x98nBXo4cEoTU9G2zLe8HA@mail.gmail.com>
 <2023052647-tacking-wince-85c5@gregkh>
In-Reply-To: <2023052647-tacking-wince-85c5@gregkh>
From:   Lorenz Bauer <lmb@isovalent.com>
Date:   Tue, 30 May 2023 13:24:28 +0200
Message-ID: <CAN+4W8jn2P9LtB=4FtWxFikmEdGGbaxBvUg7swkip+EzqfzHPg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.2 08/30] selftests/bpf: check that modifier
 resolves after pointer
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        stable@vger.kernel.org, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>,
        ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org,
        shuah@kernel.org, yhs@fb.com, eddyz87@gmail.com, sdf@google.com,
        error27@gmail.com, iii@linux.ibm.com, memxor@gmail.com,
        bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 6:43=E2=80=AFPM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org=
> wrote:
>
> So what tree(s) does this need to be backported to?  I'm confused, this
> is a 6.2 email thread which is long end-of-life.

That would be 5.10 from what I can tell. Other LTS kernels have
working tools/testing/selftests/bpf.

I replied here because you asked for examples :)

> It can be avoided by people testing and letting me know when things
> break :)

Fair enough. Earlier you said:

> And selftests should NOT be broken on stable releases, if so, something
> is wrong as no other subsystem has that happen.

Why is bpf special in this regard then?

Best
Lorenz