On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 3:59 AM Stephen Rothwell <s...@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the bpf-next tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc perf)
> failed like this:
>
> In file included from xsk.c:32:
> libbpf_util.h:49:3: error: #warning Architecture missing native barrier
> functions in libbpf_util.h. [-Werror=cpp]
> # warning Architecture missing native barrier functions in libbpf_util.h.
> ^~~~~~~
> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>
> Caused by commit
>
> b7e3a28019c9 ("libbpf: remove dependency on barrier.h in xsk.h")
>
> I have applied the following patch for today ... please fix this.
>
> From: Stephen Rothwell <s...@canb.auug.org.au>
> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 11:54:56 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] suppress warning in tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_util.h
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <s...@canb.auug.org.au>
> ---
> tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_util.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_util.h b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_util.h
> index 172b707e007b..a54eb2cdbdd6 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_util.h
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_util.h
> @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ do { \
> # define libbpf_smp_mb() asm volatile("dmb ish" : : : "memory")
> # define libbpf_smp_rwmb() libbpf_smp_mb()
> #else
> -# warning Architecture missing native barrier functions in libbpf_util.h.
> +//# warning Architecture missing native barrier functions in libbpf_util.h.
> # define libbpf_smp_rmb() __sync_synchronize()
> # define libbpf_smp_wmb() __sync_synchronize()
> # define libbpf_smp_mb() __sync_synchronize()
> --
> 2.20.1
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
My apologies, I will fix this. I just have two questions first so I do
not mess things up.
* I see my commit in bpf-next but not in bpf. As I submitted it
against bpf, what was the reason it was applied to bpf-next instead?
Unfortunately, I forgot to add "Fixes" tags to the commits, so was
this the reason? I view 4 out of 5 of these patches as bug fixes, the
last one being an optimization.
* Do you want a separate patch for this fix or a V4 of the original
patch set? Against bpf-next or bpf (with Fixes tags)?
Thanks: Magnus
