On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 10:28:39AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 9:21 AM Martin Lau <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 08:13:18PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > > Given lots of selftests won't work without recent enough Clang/LLVM that > > > fully supports BTF, there is no point in maintaining outdated BTF > > > support detection and fall-back to pahole logic. Just assume we have > > > everything we need. > > May be an error message to tell which llvm is needed? > > Not sure where we'd want this to be checked/printed. We don't do this > today, so what I'm doing here is not really a regression. > There is no single llvm version I'd want to pin down. For most tests > LLVM w/ basic BTF support would be enough, for CO-RE stuff we need the > latest Clang 10 (not yet released officially), though. So essentially > the stance right now is that you need latest Clang built from sources > to have all the tests compiled and I don't think it's easy to check > for that.
At some point once bpf-gcc gets more mature, we might need something more elaborate than just telling everyone to use latest clang/llvm from git, but so far that's our convention we have in place today. > > $(CPU) and $(PROBE) are no longer needed also? > > Good catch, removing them as well. Ok, expecting v2 then. Thanks, Daniel
