> On Mar 21, 2022, at 5:13 PM, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 9:58 AM Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >>>> On Mar 19, 2022, at 11:08 PM, Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> Since we have alread switched to memcg-based memory accouting and control, >>> we don't need RLIMIT_MEMLOCK any more. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@xxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@xxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> --- >>> RLIMIT_MEMLOCK is still used in bpftool and libbpf, but it may be useful >>> for backward compatibility, so I don't cleanup them. >> >> Hi Yafang! >> >> As I remember, we haven’t cleaned selftests up with the same logic: it’s nice to be able to run the same version of tests on older kernels. >> > > It should be fine, at least for test_progs and test_progs-no_alu32. > Libbpf now does this automatically if running in "libbpf 1.0" mode. Didn’t know this, thanks! Do we link all tests with it? > > Yafang, please make sure that all the test binaries you are cleaning > up have libbpf_set_strict_mode(LIBBPF_STRICT_ALL) (test_progs does > already). You might need to clean up some SEC() definitions, in case > we still missed some non-conforming ones, though. If so, no objections to the patch from my side. Thank you!
