Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] bpftool: Fix the static linkage failure

Andrii Nakryiko
2024-12-12T23:53:16Z

On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 12:26 PM Leo Yan <leo.yan@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 10:18:10AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 09:31:11AM +0000, Leo Yan wrote:
> > > This series follows up on the discussion in [1] for fixing the static
> > > linkage issue in bpftool.
> > >
> > > Patch 01 introduces a new feature for libelf-zstd. If this feature
> > > is detected, it means the zstd lib is required by libelf.
> > >
> > > Patch 02 is a minor improvement for linking the zstd lib in the perf.
> > >
> > > Patch 03 fixes the static build failure by linking the zstd lib when
> > > the feature-libelf-zstd is detected.
> >
> > So, this was originally reported as a perf build failure when trying a
> > static build, so something not so common, no urgency, I guess, but it
> > involves a tools/perf/bpftool/Makefile change, I think I can process
> > this as I'll then test it in the many build containers for old distros I
> > have, ok?
>
> As Quentin said in another reply, there is a delta change between the
> Linux perf tree and bpf-next tree. So this series has a conflict on
> bpf-next tree but it can be applied cleanly on perf tree.
>
> Before I respin to update the commit logs based on comments, I need BPF
> maintainers agreement with Arnaldo on proceeding on which source tree
> to proceed with.
>

I think it's fine to route this through a perf tree.

Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>

> Thanks,
> Leo