On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 10:50 AM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 2:46 AM Alexei Starovoitov > <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 06:26:44PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > > Originally, bpfilter_umh was linked with -static only when > > > CONFIG_BPFILTER_UMH=y. > > > > > > Commit 8a2cc0505cc4 ("bpfilter: use 'userprogs' syntax to build > > > bpfilter_umh") silently, accidentally dropped the CONFIG_BPFILTER_UMH=y > > > test in the Makefile. Revive it in order to link it dynamically when > > > CONFIG_BPFILTER_UMH=m. > > > > > > Since commit b1183b6dca3e ("bpfilter: check if $(CC) can link static > > > libc in Kconfig"), the compiler must be capable of static linking to > > > enable CONFIG_BPFILTER_UMH, but it requires more than needed. > > > > > > To loosen the compiler requirement, I changed the dependency as follows: > > > > > > depends on CC_CAN_LINK > > > depends on m || CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC > > > > > > If CONFIG_CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC in unset, CONFIG_BPFILTER_UMH is restricted > > > to 'm' or 'n'. > > > > > > In theory, CONFIG_CC_CAN_LINK is not required for CONFIG_BPFILTER_UMH=y, > > > but I did not come up with a good way to describe it. > > > > > > Fixes: 8a2cc0505cc4 ("bpfilter: use 'userprogs' syntax to build bpfilter_umh") > > > Reported-by: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@xxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > lgtm > > Do you mind I'll take it into bpf-next tree? > > Eric is working on a bunch of patches in this area. I'll take his set > > into bpf-next as well and then can apply this patch. > > Just to make sure there are no conflicts. > > Please go ahead. I've merged Eric's set and applied yours on top. Thanks