On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 10:35:19AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 12:19:53PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu: > > On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 11:34:44AM -0800, Ian Rogers wrote: > > > Oh, just to note. While failing the feature test is disappointing for > > > a libbpf that isn't very old, we have the newer libbpf to statically > > > build in. Developers won't be impacted due to the static route. If you > > > are a distro maintainer, you should just update your libbpf. So we > > > could just bump the API assumption to 1.0 as I believe that'd have the > > > advantage of removing feature tests, workarounds, untested code (like > > > what broke here), etc. > > > > What do you think? > > > yes, seems good.. fedora has libbpf 1.0 already so should not be problem > > there at least ;-) > > So, I already pushed 1/2 to perf/urgent, can I stick an Acked-by: jolsa > to the second? yes jirka
