Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/linux-tools: Exclude checking PE binaries from perf test

From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>
To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Cc: buildroot@buildroot.org
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/linux-tools: Exclude checking PE binaries from perf test
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2022 23:38:56 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220928233856.77bb191c@windsurf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220927221133.594071-1-f.fainelli@gmail.com>

Hello Florian,

On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 15:11:33 -0700
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote:

> Since upstream Linux commit ed21d6d7c48e6e96c2d617e304a7ebfbd17b1807
> ("perf tests: Add test for PE binary format support") present in >=
> v5.10 there is an unconditional installation of PE binaries which will
> be rejected by the check-bin-arch script.
> 
> Make sure that these binaries are excluded from being checked to allow
> the installation of the perf tests.
> 
> Fixes: 6fcdaa4c5096 ("package/linux-tools: Allow installation of perf scripts")
> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>

Thanks for the patch! Before merging it, I'd like to understand a
little bit more how readelf behaves for these PE files. Indeed in
check-bin-arch, we are doing:

        arch=$(LC_ALL=C ${readelf} -h "${TARGET_DIR}/${f}" 2>&1 | \
                       sed -r -e '/^  Machine: +(.+)/!d; s//\1/;' | head -1)

        # If no architecture found, assume it was not an ELF file
        if test "${arch}" = "" ; then
                continue
        fi

for a PE file, I would expect readelf to badly fail, and therefore
${arch} to be empty, and the file simply ignored.

What is the behavior/output of readelf on these PE files?

Thanks!

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot