On Thu Apr 30, 2026 at 1:41 PM -03, bot+bpf-ci wrote: >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile >> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile >> @@ -44,6 +44,12 @@ >> SKIP_LIBBFD ?= >> SKIP_CRYPTO ?= >> >> +# When BPF_STRICT_BUILD is 1, any BPF object, skeleton, test object, or >> +# benchmark compilation failure is fatal. Set to 0 to tolerate failures >> +# and continue building the remaining tests. >> +BPF_STRICT_BUILD ?= 1 >> +PERMISSIVE := $(filter 0,$(BPF_STRICT_BUILD)) > ^^^^ > > The PERMISSIVE variable is defined here but never used anywhere in the > Makefile. The commit message claims "subsequent Makefile rules use to > make individual build steps non-fatal," but a search through the file > shows PERMISSIVE only appears at this definition line. > > This makes the BPF_STRICT_BUILD=0 option documented in the commit message > non-functional. Users following the provided example will expect permissive > mode to work, but it has no actual effect. > > Should this commit include the Makefile rules that actually use PERMISSIVE, > or is this feature incomplete?
Users of this come later in the series. Kept as standalone commit for improving readability a bit. > > > --- > 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/25176431268
