From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Leo Yan" <leo.yan@arm.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 7/8] selftests/bpf: Use common CFLAGS for urandom_read
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2026 17:25:59 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260602172559.B3A1D1F00898@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260602-tools_build_fix_zero_init_bpf_only-v2-7-c76e5250ea1c@arm.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] Replacing CFLAGS with COMMON_CFLAGS for urandom_read breaks cross-compilation with Clang.
--
commit 537d69efefb1121c195758d9362eba3f31c54f36
Author: Leo Yan <leo.yan@arm.com>
selftests/bpf: Use common CFLAGS for urandom_read
This commit introduces a COMMON_CFLAGS variable to separate general flags
from CC-specific ones that might be incompatible with CLANG when building
urandom_read and its shared library.
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
> index bc049620c7745..1e47e29ba4214 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
> @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ srctree := $(patsubst %/,%,$(dir $(srctree)))
> srctree := $(patsubst %/,%,$(dir $(srctree)))
> endif
>
> -CFLAGS += -g $(OPT_FLAGS) -rdynamic -std=gnu11 \
> +COMMON_CFLAGS = -g $(OPT_FLAGS) -rdynamic -std=gnu11 \
[Severity: Low]
Does this change break cross-compilation with Clang?
By defining COMMON_CFLAGS from scratch without including the pre-existing
CFLAGS, this drops any earlier contents from the urandom_read build.
This strips CLANG_CROSS_FLAGS (which is appended to CFLAGS earlier by
tools/scripts/Makefile.include), depriving Clang of essential
cross-compilation arguments like --sysroot and --gcc-toolchain.
Does this also inadvertently ignore any user-provided CFLAGS?
[ ... ]
> @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ endif
> $(OUTPUT)/liburandom_read.so: urandom_read_lib1.c urandom_read_lib2.c liburandom_read.map
> $(call msg,LIB,,$@)
> $(Q)$(CLANG) $(CLANG_TARGET_ARCH) \
> - $(filter-out -static,$(CFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS)) \
> + $(filter-out -static,$(COMMON_CFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS)) \
[Severity: Low]
When replacing CFLAGS with COMMON_CFLAGS here for the shared library build,
does this remove the required sysroot and toolchain cross-compilation flags?
[ ... ]
> @@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ $(OUTPUT)/liburandom_read.so: urandom_read_lib1.c urandom_read_lib2.c liburandom
> $(OUTPUT)/urandom_read: urandom_read.c urandom_read_aux.c $(OUTPUT)/liburandom_read.so
> $(call msg,BINARY,,$@)
> $(Q)$(CLANG) $(CLANG_TARGET_ARCH) \
> - $(filter-out -static,$(CFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS)) $(filter %.c,$^) \
> + $(filter-out -static,$(COMMON_CFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS)) $(filter %.c,$^) \
[Severity: Low]
Similarly, does the urandom_read build rule also lose these required
cross-compilation flags when using COMMON_CFLAGS?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260602-tools_build_fix_zero_init_bpf_only-v2-0-c76e5250ea1c@arm.com?part=7
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-02 17:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-02 14:47 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/8] tools build: bpf: Append EXTRA_CFLAGS and HOST_EXTRACFLAGS Leo Yan
2026-06-02 14:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/8] bpftool: Pass host flags to bootstrap libbpf Leo Yan
2026-06-03 9:21 ` Quentin Monnet
2026-06-02 14:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/8] bpftool: Avoid adding EXTRA_CFLAGS to HOST_CFLAGS Leo Yan
2026-06-02 14:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 3/8] bpftool: Append extra host flags Leo Yan
2026-06-02 14:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 4/8] libbpf: Initialize CFLAGS before including Makefile.include Leo Yan
2026-06-02 15:11 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-02 14:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 5/8] tools/bpf: build: Append extra cflags Leo Yan
2026-06-13 1:09 ` Ihor Solodrai
2026-06-02 14:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 6/8] selftests/bpf: Initialize operation name before use Leo Yan
2026-06-13 1:11 ` Ihor Solodrai
2026-06-02 14:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 7/8] selftests/bpf: Use common CFLAGS for urandom_read Leo Yan
2026-06-02 15:32 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-02 17:25 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-06-13 1:37 ` Ihor Solodrai
2026-06-02 14:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 8/8] selftests/bpf: Avoid static LLVM linking for cross builds Leo Yan
2026-06-02 17:33 ` sashiko-bot
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=20260602172559.B3A1D1F00898@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=leo.yan@arm.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@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