From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Borkmann Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] samples/bpf: fix a build issue Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 22:02:27 +0200 Message-ID: <59652ED3.5020607@iogearbox.net> References: <20170710210428.1292358-1-yhs@fb.com> <20170711215114.4726d1da@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ast@fb.com, brakmo@fb.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer , Yonghong Song Return-path: Received: from www62.your-server.de ([213.133.104.62]:58888 "EHLO www62.your-server.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932446AbdGKUCd (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jul 2017 16:02:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20170711215114.4726d1da@redhat.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/11/2017 09:51 PM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 14:04:28 -0700 Yonghong Song wrote: > >> With latest net-next: >> ==== >> clang -nostdinc -isystem /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/6.3.1/include -I./arch/x86/include -I./arch/x86/include/generated/uapi -I./arch/x86/include/generated -I./include -I./arch/x86/include/uapi -I./include/uapi -I./include/generated/uapi -include ./include/linux/kconfig.h -Isamples/bpf \ >> -D__KERNEL__ -D__ASM_SYSREG_H -Wno-unused-value -Wno-pointer-sign \ >> -Wno-compare-distinct-pointer-types \ >> -Wno-gnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end \ >> -Wno-address-of-packed-member -Wno-tautological-compare \ >> -Wno-unknown-warning-option \ >> -O2 -emit-llvm -c samples/bpf/tcp_synrto_kern.c -o -| llc -march=bpf -filetype=obj -o samples/bpf/tcp_synrto_kern.o >> samples/bpf/tcp_synrto_kern.c:20:10: fatal error: 'bpf_endian.h' file not found >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> 1 error generated. >> ==== >> >> net has the same issue. >> >> Add support for ntohl and htonl in tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_endian.h. > > I think this patch should have been split up in two patches. One where > you fix the compile issue, and one where you add support for ntohl and > htonl. And you are also moving the file... I'm getting confused > reading this patch. Could have been done, sure. Patch is still straight forward and small as-is, so I don't really mind having this user space code squashed together.