From: "Ricardo B. Marlière" <rbm@suse.com>
To: sashiko@lists.linux.dev, "Ricardo B. Marlière" <rbm@suse.com>
Cc: <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v10 06/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate test file compilation failures
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2026 10:13:51 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DI6ILKHKXCTR.2TAXUY0YUC5DS@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260430131052.3E683C2BCB3@smtp.kernel.org>
On Thu Apr 30, 2026 at 10:10 AM -03, sashiko-bot wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [Low] The inline condition `$(if $(V))` incorrectly suppresses the `BTFIDS` pretty output when `V=0` or `V=2`.
> --
>
> commit 0d69d461adbd02ed2bb765aad81f923aeaf2a8da
> Author: Ricardo B. Marlière <rbm@suse.com>
>
> selftests/bpf: Tolerate test file compilation failures
>
> This commit makes per-test compilation non-fatal for test_progs, skipping
> missing objects during linking. It adjusts the BTFIDS step to use standard
> printf instead of the msg macro within the shell conditionals.
>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
>> index 608e6dff03926..9becc077eb231 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
>
> [ ... ]
>
>> @@ -717,11 +723,14 @@ $(TRUNNER_TEST_OBJS): $(TRUNNER_OUTPUT)/%.test.o: \
>> $(TRUNNER_TESTS_DIR)/%.c \
>> | $(TRUNNER_OUTPUT)/%.test.d
>> $$(call msg,TEST-OBJ,$(TRUNNER_BINARY),$$@)
>> - $(Q)cd $$(@D) && $$(CC) -I. $$(CFLAGS) -MMD -MT $$@ -c $(CURDIR)/$$< $$(LDLIBS) -o $$(@F)
>> + $(Q)(cd $$(@D) && $$(CC) -I. $$(CFLAGS) -MMD -MT $$@ -c $(CURDIR)/$$< $$(LDLIBS) -o $$(@F)) $(if $(filter test_progs%,$1),$(if $(PERMISSIVE),|| \
>> + ($(RM) $$@; printf ' %-12s %s\n' 'SKIP-TEST' '$$(notdir $$@)' 1>&2)))
>> $$(if $$(TEST_NEEDS_BTFIDS), \
>> - $$(call msg,BTFIDS,$(TRUNNER_BINARY),$$@) \
>> + $(Q)if [ -f $$@ ]; then \
>> + $(if $(V),true,printf ' %-8s%s %s\n' "BTFIDS" " [$(TRUNNER_BINARY)]" "$$(notdir $$@)"); \
>
> Does this condition correctly handle V=0 or V=2?
>
> In GNU Make, the $(if) function evaluates to true if the condition expands to
> any non-empty string. If a user sets make V=0, $(V) expands to the string "0",
> which Make considers true.
>
> Consequently, `$(if $(V),true,printf ...)` will execute `true;`, silencing the
> BTFIDS output entirely. The standard msg macro used for other compilation steps
> explicitly checks `ifeq ($(V),1)`.
>
> This results in inconsistent behavior where V=0 correctly prints brief messages
> like TEST-OBJ but silently skips BTFIDS.
>
> Could this explicitly check for "1", such as using
> `$(if $(filter 1,$(V)),true,printf ...)` to accurately match the behavior of
> the msg macro?
ugh I forgot about this one
>
>> $(RESOLVE_BTFIDS) --btf $(TRUNNER_OUTPUT)/btf_data.bpf.o $$@; \
>> - $(RESOLVE_BTFIDS) --patch_btfids $$@.BTF_ids $$@)
>> + $(RESOLVE_BTFIDS) --patch_btfids $$@.BTF_ids $$@; \
>> + fi)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-30 13:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-30 12:53 [PATCH bpf-next v10 00/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate partial builds across kernel configs Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 01/11] selftests/bpf: Add BPF_STRICT_BUILD toggle Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 02/11] selftests/bpf: Fix test_kmods KDIR to honor O= and distro kernels Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 13:30 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-30 14:09 ` Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 03/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate BPF and skeleton generation failures Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 04/11] selftests/bpf: Avoid rebuilds when running emit_tests Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 05/11] selftests/bpf: Make skeleton headers order-only prerequisites of .test.d Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 13:30 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-30 15:04 ` Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 13:41 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 06/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate test file compilation failures Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 13:10 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-30 13:13 ` Ricardo B. Marlière [this message]
2026-04-30 13:30 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 07/11] selftests/bpf: Skip tests whose objects were not built Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 13:13 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-30 13:30 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-30 15:52 ` Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 08/11] selftests/bpf: Allow test_progs to link with a partial object set Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 09/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate benchmark build failures Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 10/11] selftests/bpf: Provide weak definitions for cross-test functions Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 13:30 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 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=DI6ILKHKXCTR.2TAXUY0YUC5DS@suse.com \
--to=rbm@suse.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--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