Hi Jason, On 2/19/25 12:44 AM, Jason Xing wrote: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 4:27 PM <bot+bpf-ci@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Dear patch submitter, >> >> CI has tested the following submission: >> Status: FAILURE >> Name: [bpf-next,v3,0/2] bpf: support setting max RTO for bpf_setsockopt >> Patchwork: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=935463&state=* >> Matrix: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954 >> >> Failed jobs: >> build-aarch64-gcc: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954/job/37452248960 >> build-s390x-gcc: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954/job/37452248633 >> build-x86_64-gcc: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954/job/37452249287 >> build-x86_64-llvm-17: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954/job/37452250339 >> build-x86_64-llvm-17-O2: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954/job/37452250688 >> build-x86_64-llvm-18: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954/job/37452251018 >> build-x86_64-llvm-18-O2: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/13408235954/job/37452251311 >> >> >> Please note: this email is coming from an unmonitored mailbox. If you have >> questions or feedback, please reach out to the Meta Kernel CI team at >> kernel-ci@xxxxxxxx. > I think the only diff I made is that I removed the change in > tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h from V2. > diff --git a/tools/include/uapi/linux/tcp.h b/tools/include/uapi/linux/tcp.h > index 13ceeb395eb8..7989e3f34a58 100644 > --- a/tools/include/uapi/linux/tcp.h > +++ b/tools/include/uapi/linux/tcp.h > @@ -128,6 +128,7 @@ enum { > #define TCP_CM_INQ TCP_INQ > > #define TCP_TX_DELAY 37 /* delay outgoing packets by XX usec */ > +#define TCP_RTO_MAX_MS 44 /* max rto time in ms */ > > Last time everything was fine. I doubt it has something to do with the > failure :S > > But I tested it locally and could not reproduce it. Could it be caused > because of applying to a wrong branch? I'm afraid not, right? It looks like TCP_RTO_MAX_MS is defined in include/uapi/linux/tcp.h. But I don't see a uapi include in net/core/filter.c where you're using the definition. Given the transitive dependency, perhaps some other file shifted? Seems better to directly include the uapi header if you're going to use it. Thanks, Daniel
