Björn Töpel <bjorn@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > From: Björn Töpel <bjorn@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > When the BPF selftests are cross-compiled, only the a host version of > bpftool is built. This version of bpftool is used to generate various > intermediates, e.g., skeletons. > > The test runners are also using bpftool. The Makefile will symlink > bpftool from the selftest/bpf root, where the test runners will look > for the tool: > > | ... > | $(Q)ln -sf $(if $2,..,.)/tools/build/bpftool/bootstrap/bpftool \ > | $(OUTPUT)/$(if $2,$2/)bpftool > > There are two issues for cross-compilation builds: > > 1. There is no native (cross-compilation target) build of bpftool > 2. The bootstrap variant of bpftool is never cross-compiled (by > design) > > Make sure that a native/cross-compiled version of bpftool is built, > and if CROSS_COMPILE is set, symlink to the native/non-bootstrap > version. ...and the grand master plan is to add BPF CI support for riscv64, where this patch a prerequisite to [1]. I would suspect that other platforms might benefit from cross-compilation builds as well. [1] https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/pull/194
