Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/6] libbpf: move bpf_helpers.h, bpf_endian.h into libbpf

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 16:30:02 -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 4:18 PM Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 15:58:35 -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:  
> > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 3:55 PM Song Liu <liu.song.a23@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:  
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 1:43 PM Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@xxxxxx> wrote:  
> > > > >
> > > > > Make bpf_helpers.h and bpf_endian.h official part of libbpf. Ensure they
> > > > > are installed along the other libbpf headers.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@xxxxxx>  
> > > >
> > > > Can we merge/rearrange 2/6 and 3/6, so they is a git-rename instead of
> > > > many +++ and ---?  
> > >
> > > I arranged them that way because of Github sync. We don't sync
> > > selftests/bpf changes to Github, and it causes more churn if commits
> > > have a mix of libbpf and selftests changes.
> > >
> > > I didn't modify bpf_helpers.h/bpf_endian.h between those patches, so
> > > don't worry about reviewing contents ;)  
> >
> > I thought we were over this :/ Please merge the patches.  
> 
> I'll merge those two patches, our sync script can handle that now,
> though with a bit of human input. I'm not exactly sure on the "why"
> though

Awesome, thank you!

> I think generally splitting libbpf changes and selftests
> changes is a good thing, no?

I'm not sure, here headers are moved to a better location. To me it
seems like the logical change is move, rather than add X, remove X.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux