From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
To: Daniel Xu <dlxu@meta.com>, Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@gmail.com>,
Ihor Solodrai <ihor.solodrai@linux.dev>
Cc: kernel-ci <kernel-ci@meta.com>,
"andrii@kernel.org" <andrii@kernel.org>,
"daniel@iogearbox.net" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
"bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org" <bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 0/2] bpf: support setting max RTO for bpf_setsockopt
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 13:12:24 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44e56c1a-3445-4cae-abdb-76ada1084193@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bfc930d1-4a96-47c1-a250-e53dfe7a153f@meta.com>
On 2/19/25 8:33 AM, Daniel Xu wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> On 2/19/25 12:44 AM, Jason Xing wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 4:27 PM <bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org> wrote:
>>> Dear patch submitter,
>>>
>>> CI has tested the following submission:
>>> Status: FAILURE
>>> Name: [bpf-next,v3,0/2] bpf: support setting max RTO for bpf_setsockopt
>>> Patchwork: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=935463&state=*
>>> Matrix: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954
>>>
>>> Failed jobs:
>>> build-aarch64-gcc: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954/job/37452248960
>>> build-s390x-gcc: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954/job/37452248633
>>> build-x86_64-gcc: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954/job/37452249287
>>> build-x86_64-llvm-17: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954/job/37452250339
>>> build-x86_64-llvm-17-O2: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954/job/37452250688
>>> build-x86_64-llvm-18: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954/job/37452251018
>>> build-x86_64-llvm-18-O2: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954/job/37452251311
>>>
>>>
>>> Please note: this email is coming from an unmonitored mailbox. If you have
>>> questions or feedback, please reach out to the Meta Kernel CI team at
>>> kernel-ci@meta.com.
>> I think the only diff I made is that I removed the change in
>> tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h from V2.
>> diff --git a/tools/include/uapi/linux/tcp.h b/tools/include/uapi/linux/tcp.h
>> index 13ceeb395eb8..7989e3f34a58 100644
>> --- a/tools/include/uapi/linux/tcp.h
>> +++ b/tools/include/uapi/linux/tcp.h
>> @@ -128,6 +128,7 @@ enum {
>> #define TCP_CM_INQ TCP_INQ
>>
>> #define TCP_TX_DELAY 37 /* delay outgoing packets by XX usec */
>> +#define TCP_RTO_MAX_MS 44 /* max rto time in ms */
>>
>> Last time everything was fine. I doubt it has something to do with the
>> failure :S
kernel should not need tools/include, so no.
>>
>> But I tested it locally and could not reproduce it. Could it be caused
>> because of applying to a wrong branch? I'm afraid not, right?
Right, in v2, the patch 1 cannot be applied to bpf-next/master, so the bpf CI
retried with bpf-next/net. It is the current bpf CI setup.
That v2's patch 1 is removed in v3, so the v3 applied cleanly to bpf-next/master
and the bpf CI moved forward to test it.
I tested locally and I have applied v3 to bpf-next/net. Thanks.
May be the bpf CI can retry with bpf-next/net also there is kernel compilation
error.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-19 21:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-19 8:13 [PATCH bpf-next v3 0/2] bpf: support setting max RTO for bpf_setsockopt Jason Xing
2025-02-19 8:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/2] bpf: support TCP_RTO_MAX_MS " Jason Xing
2025-02-20 8:51 ` kernel test robot
2025-02-20 8:57 ` Jason Xing
2025-02-22 1:40 ` Philip Li
2025-02-22 22:51 ` kernel test robot
2025-02-19 8:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 2/2] selftests/bpf: add rto max for bpf_setsockopt test Jason Xing
[not found] ` <38bb5556f4c90c7d4fbe9933ba3984136f5f3d5cf8d95e4f4bc6cbfb02e1e019@mail.kernel.org>
[not found] ` <CAL+tcoDZAwZojcMQZ_bc71bxDpdfSE=q5_6eXirZLEWXFnY33w@mail.gmail.com>
2025-02-19 16:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 0/2] bpf: support setting max RTO for bpf_setsockopt Daniel Xu
2025-02-19 21:12 ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]
2025-02-19 23:33 ` Jason Xing
2025-02-19 21:11 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=44e56c1a-3445-4cae-abdb-76ada1084193@linux.dev \
--to=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=dlxu@meta.com \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=kernel-ci@meta.com \
--cc=kerneljasonxing@gmail.com \
/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