From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C038C55174 for ; Wed, 5 Aug 2026 07:08:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4hFM1v2Bj7z2xqM; Wed, 05 Aug 2026 17:08:03 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip="2600:3c0a:e001:78e:0:1991:8:25" ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1785913683; cv=none; b=H1KoYH8AusjuVikwG2txclQEmJPg852S+mgLLkOZneuOQZJ3EoFZ6xMUTyHakYh2ktRYc9xNYmcWxGR2nANdW9tmmtIq0At4c8RcEYbOSYBTEP5T6nw5K6+dNBNmUaGc24Je3fPcv7wzHy0PWc+5lF2I0zhWSQcOrIwAMEBDmgs94CO5K2joWBIZ+a4mIqK9z1i4lT+p3nmjKsaqKEkEHv7OqtaXmJAhXilr9Pxz4mZ6EiW5d6ZW6Q8/strScIV+FHcNUm2kXfbO2FWC7/c3VPog3NXP1C0e3j96tbMzhvQ+DXlew+JrBYSSy7z36x8Uya0M3Dg4avV+kvGujztA3g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1785913683; c=relaxed/relaxed; bh=UGMpfuT8snJ0tfEwGHyplWLK/i+F2oymMko+Mu78Kgc=; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: Subject:From:To:Cc:Date; b=el18G/a/j9F8hqF+cjvZDZRRHXlsujytpcvoB1D1HICXVHilvQMqtPJjJKKAu2HfyvKpkaoPpf4qj21rr+/VaurBXmO8umbGvh66D8KeO8MCUYKt+rsVK6k5bnqduNaywgl8OFPUe03+5Pl6u05CsbFe6vyoI7pzSPpMH9PxejN78R9dLc4dz0e46oUlWMTux0WkIj6wqU7BO2DgROn16RG2FAdgnQ+fJUV7wLwGFTR0FyUNLK/YGNsqGZQQ/f0KOSvp3/Vp3+87ryhGfPYd9YarYg9h0GAk5Iu7n1whC+zCGfl0HdM6rOQC+l4TR9LYDxKYMf+XxBDROhrzwxBEdg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=m8gTQU9Z; dkim-atps=neutral; spf=pass (client-ip=2600:3c0a:e001:78e:0:1991:8:25; helo=sea.source.kernel.org; envelope-from=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=m8gTQU9Z; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org (client-ip=2600:3c0a:e001:78e:0:1991:8:25; helo=sea.source.kernel.org; envelope-from=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from sea.source.kernel.org (sea.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2600:3c0a:e001:78e:0:1991:8:25]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4hFM1t1LClz2xpn for ; Wed, 05 Aug 2026 17:08:02 +1000 (AEST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) by sea.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 651E04059A; Wed, 5 Aug 2026 07:07:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6444D1F000E9; Wed, 5 Aug 2026 07:07:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1785913679; bh=UGMpfuT8snJ0tfEwGHyplWLK/i+F2oymMko+Mu78Kgc=; h=In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date; b=m8gTQU9ZFMy92/rC16QxOHZfJw/kMrRJPhdx7cuc13a+8XkfbClmetnJiDjGw7kxo alS0UTHx7Zct0mAfLYRN21R8sg8rsHliQJK+cqUNYdNGvdLNSqdG4BpJNi0AhAYa3+ uJJFTepTFDX1X6x0KlhKPBl/hXQ/SGkNAfL4euPAxrmTuerAXggUiBeuzn28O1J3Mg wS8yQfmuqqIzrJ10TNlckzEIqCHt4qCYRsE5yT7oBdqNs9H5U6/linqwet6BEyEsmR cByYnCYyCxjDPVrRhC906M1dHJ1/n07jkxltxBXLRcjgBpdiJbRxLKOZ14UT+0GoW5 Z8Ih6G8q7+1Qg== Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7106082230189184574==" X-Mailing-List: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Archive: , List-Subscribe: , , List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <5ef8aa40184d48efe9c1fb0def756263a654c22e4908bc803d0d92426e07ef52@mail.kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <84353363810b8d63e7933391f5c6a2ea46f348e3.1785906979.git.skb99@linux.ibm.com> References: <84353363810b8d63e7933391f5c6a2ea46f348e3.1785906979.git.skb99@linux.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 4/8] selftest/bpf: Enable verifier selftest for powerpc64 From: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org To: skb99@linux.ibm.com,bpf@vger.kernel.org,linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Cc: hbathini@linux.ibm.com,maddy@linux.ibm.com,ast@kernel.org,andrii@kernel.org,daniel@iogearbox.net,shuah@kernel.org,linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,stable@vger.kernel.org,venkat88@linux.ibm.com,yeswanth@linux.ibm.com,skb99@linux.ibm.com,ast@kernel.org,andrii@kernel.org,daniel@iogearbox.net,martin.lau@kernel.org,eddyz87@gmail.com,yonghong.song@linux.dev,clm@meta.com,ihor.solodrai@linux.dev Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 07:07:58 +0000 (UTC) --===============7106082230189184574== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > selftest/bpf: Enable verifier selftest for powerpc64 > > This patch enables arch specifier "__powerpc64" in verifier > selftest for ppc64. Power 32-bit would require separate > handling. Changes tested for 64-bit only. This isn't a bug, but would it read more precisely to name the new tag as __arch_powerpc64 (matching the macro added in bpf_misc.h) rather than "__powerpc64"? The actual macro expands to __arch("POWERPC64"), and "__powerpc64__" is the compiler predefine used in test_loader.c, but there's no __powerpc64 tag itself. Also, would phrasing it imperatively match the series style better? For example, "Add __arch_powerpc64 so verifier tests can gate on ppc64" instead of "This patch enables..."? > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_misc.h b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_misc.h > index 5eacf1b432521..c35359c97e44b 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_misc.h > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_misc.h > @@ -159,6 +159,7 @@ > #define __arch_riscv64 __arch("RISCV64") > #define __arch_s390x __arch("s390x") > #define __arch_loongarch __arch("LOONGARCH") > +#define __arch_powerpc64 __arch("POWERPC64") > #define __caps_unpriv(caps) __test_tag("test_caps_unpriv=" EXPAND_QUOTE(caps)) > #define __load_if_JITed() __test_tag("load_mode=jited") > #define __load_if_no_JITed() __test_tag("load_mode=no_jited") > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_loader.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_loader.c > index 07807757b518d..221393f2a8ef4 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_loader.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_loader.c > @@ -378,6 +378,7 @@ enum arch { > ARCH_RISCV64 = 0x8, > ARCH_S390X = 0x10, > ARCH_LOONGARCH = 0x20, > + ARCH_POWERPC64 = 0x40, > }; > > static int get_current_arch(void) > @@ -392,6 +393,8 @@ static int get_current_arch(void) > return ARCH_S390X; > #elif defined(__loongarch__) > return ARCH_LOONGARCH; > +#elif defined(__powerpc64__) > + return ARCH_POWERPC64; > #endif > return ARCH_UNKNOWN; > } > @@ -585,6 +588,8 @@ static int parse_test_spec(struct test_loader *tester, > arch = ARCH_S390X; > } else if (strcmp(val, "LOONGARCH") == 0) { > arch = ARCH_LOONGARCH; > + } else if (strcmp(val, "POWERPC64") == 0) { > + arch = ARCH_POWERPC64; > } else { > PRINT_FAIL("bad arch spec: '%s'\n", val); > err = -EINVAL; --- AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug. See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/30981212698 --===============7106082230189184574==--