From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Ricardo B. Marlière" <rbm@suse.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v7 02/11] selftests/bpf: Fix test_kmods KDIR to honor O= and distro kernels
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2026 19:52:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260416195234.54D56C2BCAF@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260416-selftests-bpf_misconfig-v7-2-a078e18012e4@suse.com>
Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s):
- [High] Overloading of O= incorrectly aliases the selftest output directory to the kernel build directory.
- [Medium] Relative paths passed to O= are incorrectly resolved against the sub-make's working directory.
--
commit 7a429745e6e5a3d1081ae76477bd32a034698ba8
Author: Ricardo B. Marlière <rbm@suse.com>
selftests/bpf: Fix test_kmods KDIR to honor O= and distro kernels
This commit modifies the test_kmods Makefile to respect the O= and
KBUILD_OUTPUT variables for locating the correct kernel build directory.
It falls back to /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/build when neither an explicit
build directory nor an in-tree Module.symvers is present.
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmods/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmods/Makefile
> index 63c4d3f6a12f6..ba6f6ed6ab8c0 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmods/Makefile
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmods/Makefile
> @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
> TEST_KMOD_DIR := $(realpath $(dir $(abspath $(lastword $(MAKEFILE_LIST)))))
> -KDIR ?= $(abspath $(TEST_KMOD_DIR)/../../../../..)
> +SRCTREE_KDIR := $(abspath $(TEST_KMOD_DIR)/../../../../..)
> +KMOD_O := $(abspath $(or $(O),$(KBUILD_OUTPUT)))
If a user specifies a relative path like "make O=out", will this resolve
incorrectly against the sub-make's current working directory instead of the
parent directory?
Since abspath is evaluated inside the test_kmods sub-make, a relative
O=out would evaluate to .../test_kmods/out instead of .../bpf/out,
potentially breaking out-of-tree builds. Does the path need to be
resolved to an absolute path before the sub-make transition?
Additionally, when building selftests out-of-tree via
"make O=/tmp/selftests -C tools/testing/selftests", O= strictly defines the
selftests output directory.
Since O takes precedence in $(or $(O),$(KBUILD_OUTPUT)), will it shadow a
valid KBUILD_OUTPUT? This could cause kbuild to fail due to a missing
.config or Module.symvers in the selftests directory.
Could the Makefile differentiate the selftest output directory from the
kernel build directory, or verify that $(KMOD_O) actually contains a
prepared kernel build before forcing kbuild to use it?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260416-selftests-bpf_misconfig-v7-0-a078e18012e4@suse.com?part=2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-16 19:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-16 19:30 [PATCH bpf-next v7 00/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate partial builds across kernel configs Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-16 19:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 01/11] selftests/bpf: Add BPF_STRICT_BUILD toggle Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-16 19:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 02/11] selftests/bpf: Fix test_kmods KDIR to honor O= and distro kernels Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-16 19:52 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-04-16 19:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 03/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate BPF and skeleton generation failures Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-16 19:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 04/11] selftests/bpf: Avoid rebuilds when running emit_tests Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-16 19:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 05/11] selftests/bpf: Make skeleton headers order-only prerequisites of .test.d Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-16 19:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 06/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate test file compilation failures Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-16 19:55 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-16 19:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 07/11] selftests/bpf: Skip tests whose objects were not built Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-16 19:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 08/11] selftests/bpf: Allow test_progs to link with a partial object set Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-16 20:05 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-16 19:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 09/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate benchmark build failures Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-16 19:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 10/11] selftests/bpf: Provide weak definitions for cross-test functions Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-16 19:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 11/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate missing files during install Ricardo B. Marlière
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260416195234.54D56C2BCAF@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rbm@suse.com \
--cc=sashiko@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox