On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 03:58:43PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 10:38 AM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi Artem, > > > > On 11/4/22 2:29 PM, KP Singh wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 10:41 AM Artem Savkov <asavkov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> > > >> lld produces "fast" style build-ids by default, which is inconsistent > > >> with ld's "sha1" style. Explicitly specify build-id style to be "sha1" > > >> when linking liburandom_read.so the same way it is already done for > > >> urandom_read. > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Artem Savkov <asavkov@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Acked-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > This was done in > > > https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200922232140.1994390-1-morbo@xxxxxxxxxx > > > > When you say "fix", does it actually fix a failing test case or is it more > > of a cleanup to align liburandom_read build with urandom_read? From glancing > > at the code, we only check build id for urandom_read. I called it a "fix" because it broke expectations of external tools, but the reworded version sounds much better. > I reworded the subject to "selftests/bpf: Use consistent build-id type > for liburandom_read.so" and pushed. Thanks! Thank you, Andrii. -- Artem
