On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 2:26 AM Björn Töpel <bjorn@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@xxxxxxxxxx writes: > > > Hello: > > > > This series was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (master) > > by Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > > > On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 15:13:52 +0200 you wrote: > >> From: Björn Töpel <bjorn@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> libbpf does not include the per-arch tools include path, e.g. > >> tools/arch/riscv/include. Some architectures depend those files to > >> build properly. > >> > >> Include tools/arch/$(SUBARCH)/include in the libbpf build. > >> > >> [...] > > > > Here is the summary with links: > > - [bpf-next,1/2] libbpf: Add missing per-arch include path > > https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/710fbca820c7 > > - [bpf-next,2/2] selftests: bpf: Add missing per-arch include path > > https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/19090f0306f1 > > Andrii, I just noted that this landed into bpf-next, and not bpf > (fixes). Hi Bjorn, Yes, libbpf and selftests fixes are generally applied through bpf-next, unless the issue is pretty bad and immediate. I'm sorry, but unfortunately it's too late now to move those patches as it's now been more than a month since they landed. For the future, please let us know ASAP if you think patches were misrouted. I think we are stuck with the need to do a stable backport for these, sorry. > > RISC-V libbpf/perf needs this fix in 6.12 to properly build. Would it be > possible to have it in the bpf tree, and have it land in 6.12-rc7? > > Andreas that has a similar fix [1]. > > > Björn > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/mvm5xq44bqh.fsf@xxxxxxx/