* [PATCH bpf-next] tools build: propagate build failures from tools/build/Makefile.build
@ 2020-07-31 2:42 Andrii Nakryiko
2020-08-02 3:33 ` Alexei Starovoitov
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrii Nakryiko @ 2020-07-31 2:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bpf, netdev, ast, daniel
Cc: andrii.nakryiko, kernel-team, Andrii Nakryiko, Jiri Olsa,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
The '&&' command seems to have a bad effect when $(cmd_$(1)) exits with
non-zero effect: the command failure is masked (despite `set -e`) and all but
the first command of $(dep-cmd) is executed (successfully, as they are mostly
printfs), thus overall returning 0 in the end.
This means in practice that despite compilation errors, tools's build Makefile
will return success. We see this very reliably with libbpf's Makefile, which
doesn't get compilation error propagated properly. This in turns causes issues
with selftests build, as well as bpftool and other projects that rely on
building libbpf.
The fix is simple: don't use &&. Given `set -e`, we don't need to chain
commands with &&. The shell will exit on first failure, giving desired
behavior and propagating error properly.
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
Fixes: 275e2d95591e ("tools build: Move dependency copy into function")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
---
I'm sending this against bpf-next tree, given libbpf is affected enough for me
to debug this fun problem that no one seemed to notice (or care, at least) in
almost 5 years. If there is a better kernel tree, please let me know.
tools/build/Build.include | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/build/Build.include b/tools/build/Build.include
index 9ec01f4454f9..585486e40995 100644
--- a/tools/build/Build.include
+++ b/tools/build/Build.include
@@ -74,7 +74,8 @@ dep-cmd = $(if $(wildcard $(fixdep)),
# dependencies in the cmd file
if_changed_dep = $(if $(strip $(any-prereq) $(arg-check)), \
@set -e; \
- $(echo-cmd) $(cmd_$(1)) && $(dep-cmd))
+ $(echo-cmd) $(cmd_$(1)); \
+ $(dep-cmd))
# if_changed - execute command if any prerequisite is newer than
# target, or command line has changed
--
2.24.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] tools build: propagate build failures from tools/build/Makefile.build 2020-07-31 2:42 [PATCH bpf-next] tools build: propagate build failures from tools/build/Makefile.build Andrii Nakryiko @ 2020-08-02 3:33 ` Alexei Starovoitov 2020-08-02 16:11 ` Jiri Olsa 2020-08-03 14:18 ` Daniel Borkmann 2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2020-08-02 3:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrii Nakryiko Cc: bpf, Network Development, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko, Kernel Team, Jiri Olsa, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo, Masahiro Yamada On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 7:44 PM Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> wrote: > > The '&&' command seems to have a bad effect when $(cmd_$(1)) exits with > non-zero effect: the command failure is masked (despite `set -e`) and all but > the first command of $(dep-cmd) is executed (successfully, as they are mostly > printfs), thus overall returning 0 in the end. > > This means in practice that despite compilation errors, tools's build Makefile > will return success. We see this very reliably with libbpf's Makefile, which > doesn't get compilation error propagated properly. This in turns causes issues > with selftests build, as well as bpftool and other projects that rely on > building libbpf. > > The fix is simple: don't use &&. Given `set -e`, we don't need to chain > commands with &&. The shell will exit on first failure, giving desired > behavior and propagating error properly. > > Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com> > Fixes: 275e2d95591e ("tools build: Move dependency copy into function") > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Jiri, Arnaldo, could you please review and ack? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] tools build: propagate build failures from tools/build/Makefile.build 2020-07-31 2:42 [PATCH bpf-next] tools build: propagate build failures from tools/build/Makefile.build Andrii Nakryiko 2020-08-02 3:33 ` Alexei Starovoitov @ 2020-08-02 16:11 ` Jiri Olsa 2020-08-02 18:22 ` Andrii Nakryiko 2020-08-03 14:18 ` Daniel Borkmann 2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Jiri Olsa @ 2020-08-02 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrii Nakryiko Cc: bpf, netdev, ast, daniel, andrii.nakryiko, kernel-team, Jiri Olsa, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 07:42:44PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > The '&&' command seems to have a bad effect when $(cmd_$(1)) exits with > non-zero effect: the command failure is masked (despite `set -e`) and all but > the first command of $(dep-cmd) is executed (successfully, as they are mostly > printfs), thus overall returning 0 in the end. nice, thanks for digging into this, any idea why is the failure masked? Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> jirka > > This means in practice that despite compilation errors, tools's build Makefile > will return success. We see this very reliably with libbpf's Makefile, which > doesn't get compilation error propagated properly. This in turns causes issues > with selftests build, as well as bpftool and other projects that rely on > building libbpf. > > The fix is simple: don't use &&. Given `set -e`, we don't need to chain > commands with &&. The shell will exit on first failure, giving desired > behavior and propagating error properly. > > Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com> > Fixes: 275e2d95591e ("tools build: Move dependency copy into function") > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> > --- > > I'm sending this against bpf-next tree, given libbpf is affected enough for me > to debug this fun problem that no one seemed to notice (or care, at least) in > almost 5 years. If there is a better kernel tree, please let me know. > > tools/build/Build.include | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/tools/build/Build.include b/tools/build/Build.include > index 9ec01f4454f9..585486e40995 100644 > --- a/tools/build/Build.include > +++ b/tools/build/Build.include > @@ -74,7 +74,8 @@ dep-cmd = $(if $(wildcard $(fixdep)), > # dependencies in the cmd file > if_changed_dep = $(if $(strip $(any-prereq) $(arg-check)), \ > @set -e; \ > - $(echo-cmd) $(cmd_$(1)) && $(dep-cmd)) > + $(echo-cmd) $(cmd_$(1)); \ > + $(dep-cmd)) > > # if_changed - execute command if any prerequisite is newer than > # target, or command line has changed > -- > 2.24.1 > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] tools build: propagate build failures from tools/build/Makefile.build 2020-08-02 16:11 ` Jiri Olsa @ 2020-08-02 18:22 ` Andrii Nakryiko 2020-08-02 21:51 ` Jiri Olsa 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Andrii Nakryiko @ 2020-08-02 18:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jiri Olsa Cc: Andrii Nakryiko, bpf, Networking, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Kernel Team, Jiri Olsa, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 9:11 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 07:42:44PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > The '&&' command seems to have a bad effect when $(cmd_$(1)) exits with > > non-zero effect: the command failure is masked (despite `set -e`) and all but > > the first command of $(dep-cmd) is executed (successfully, as they are mostly > > printfs), thus overall returning 0 in the end. > > nice, thanks for digging into this, > any idea why is the failure masked? Two things. 1. In make, assume you have command f = a in one function and g = b; c in another. If you write f && g, you end up with (a && b); c, right? 2. Try this shell script: set -ex false && true true It will return success. It won't execute the first true command, as expected, but won't terminate the shell as you'd expect from set -e. So basically, having a "logical operator" in a sequence of commands negates the effect of `set -e`. Intuitively I'd expect that from ||, but seems like && does that as well. if [] has similar effect -- any failing command in an if check doesn't trigger an early termination of a script. > > Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> > > jirka > > > > > This means in practice that despite compilation errors, tools's build Makefile > > will return success. We see this very reliably with libbpf's Makefile, which > > doesn't get compilation error propagated properly. This in turns causes issues > > with selftests build, as well as bpftool and other projects that rely on > > building libbpf. > > > > The fix is simple: don't use &&. Given `set -e`, we don't need to chain > > commands with &&. The shell will exit on first failure, giving desired > > behavior and propagating error properly. > > > > Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> > > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com> > > Fixes: 275e2d95591e ("tools build: Move dependency copy into function") > > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> > > --- > > > > I'm sending this against bpf-next tree, given libbpf is affected enough for me > > to debug this fun problem that no one seemed to notice (or care, at least) in > > almost 5 years. If there is a better kernel tree, please let me know. > > > > tools/build/Build.include | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/tools/build/Build.include b/tools/build/Build.include > > index 9ec01f4454f9..585486e40995 100644 > > --- a/tools/build/Build.include > > +++ b/tools/build/Build.include > > @@ -74,7 +74,8 @@ dep-cmd = $(if $(wildcard $(fixdep)), > > # dependencies in the cmd file > > if_changed_dep = $(if $(strip $(any-prereq) $(arg-check)), \ > > @set -e; \ > > - $(echo-cmd) $(cmd_$(1)) && $(dep-cmd)) > > + $(echo-cmd) $(cmd_$(1)); \ > > + $(dep-cmd)) > > > > # if_changed - execute command if any prerequisite is newer than > > # target, or command line has changed > > -- > > 2.24.1 > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] tools build: propagate build failures from tools/build/Makefile.build 2020-08-02 18:22 ` Andrii Nakryiko @ 2020-08-02 21:51 ` Jiri Olsa 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Jiri Olsa @ 2020-08-02 21:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrii Nakryiko Cc: Andrii Nakryiko, bpf, Networking, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Kernel Team, Jiri Olsa, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 11:22:07AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 9:11 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 07:42:44PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > > The '&&' command seems to have a bad effect when $(cmd_$(1)) exits with > > > non-zero effect: the command failure is masked (despite `set -e`) and all but > > > the first command of $(dep-cmd) is executed (successfully, as they are mostly > > > printfs), thus overall returning 0 in the end. > > > > nice, thanks for digging into this, > > any idea why is the failure masked? > > Two things. > > 1. In make, assume you have command f = a in one function and g = b; c > in another. If you write f && g, you end up with (a && b); c, right? > > 2. Try this shell script: > > set -ex > false && true > true > > It will return success. It won't execute the first true command, as > expected, but won't terminate the shell as you'd expect from set -e. > > So basically, having a "logical operator" in a sequence of commands > negates the effect of `set -e`. Intuitively I'd expect that from ||, > but seems like && does that as well. if [] has similar effect -- any > failing command in an if check doesn't trigger an early termination of > a script. nice, thanks for explanation jirka > > > > > Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> > > > > jirka > > > > > > > > This means in practice that despite compilation errors, tools's build Makefile > > > will return success. We see this very reliably with libbpf's Makefile, which > > > doesn't get compilation error propagated properly. This in turns causes issues > > > with selftests build, as well as bpftool and other projects that rely on > > > building libbpf. > > > > > > The fix is simple: don't use &&. Given `set -e`, we don't need to chain > > > commands with &&. The shell will exit on first failure, giving desired > > > behavior and propagating error properly. > > > > > > Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> > > > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com> > > > Fixes: 275e2d95591e ("tools build: Move dependency copy into function") > > > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> > > > --- > > > > > > I'm sending this against bpf-next tree, given libbpf is affected enough for me > > > to debug this fun problem that no one seemed to notice (or care, at least) in > > > almost 5 years. If there is a better kernel tree, please let me know. > > > > > > tools/build/Build.include | 3 ++- > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/build/Build.include b/tools/build/Build.include > > > index 9ec01f4454f9..585486e40995 100644 > > > --- a/tools/build/Build.include > > > +++ b/tools/build/Build.include > > > @@ -74,7 +74,8 @@ dep-cmd = $(if $(wildcard $(fixdep)), > > > # dependencies in the cmd file > > > if_changed_dep = $(if $(strip $(any-prereq) $(arg-check)), \ > > > @set -e; \ > > > - $(echo-cmd) $(cmd_$(1)) && $(dep-cmd)) > > > + $(echo-cmd) $(cmd_$(1)); \ > > > + $(dep-cmd)) > > > > > > # if_changed - execute command if any prerequisite is newer than > > > # target, or command line has changed > > > -- > > > 2.24.1 > > > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] tools build: propagate build failures from tools/build/Makefile.build 2020-07-31 2:42 [PATCH bpf-next] tools build: propagate build failures from tools/build/Makefile.build Andrii Nakryiko 2020-08-02 3:33 ` Alexei Starovoitov 2020-08-02 16:11 ` Jiri Olsa @ 2020-08-03 14:18 ` Daniel Borkmann 2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Daniel Borkmann @ 2020-08-03 14:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrii Nakryiko, bpf, netdev, ast Cc: andrii.nakryiko, kernel-team, Jiri Olsa, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo On 7/31/20 4:42 AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > The '&&' command seems to have a bad effect when $(cmd_$(1)) exits with > non-zero effect: the command failure is masked (despite `set -e`) and all but > the first command of $(dep-cmd) is executed (successfully, as they are mostly > printfs), thus overall returning 0 in the end. > > This means in practice that despite compilation errors, tools's build Makefile > will return success. We see this very reliably with libbpf's Makefile, which > doesn't get compilation error propagated properly. This in turns causes issues > with selftests build, as well as bpftool and other projects that rely on > building libbpf. > > The fix is simple: don't use &&. Given `set -e`, we don't need to chain > commands with &&. The shell will exit on first failure, giving desired > behavior and propagating error properly. > > Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com> > Fixes: 275e2d95591e ("tools build: Move dependency copy into function") > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Applied, thanks! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-08-03 14:18 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2020-07-31 2:42 [PATCH bpf-next] tools build: propagate build failures from tools/build/Makefile.build Andrii Nakryiko 2020-08-02 3:33 ` Alexei Starovoitov 2020-08-02 16:11 ` Jiri Olsa 2020-08-02 18:22 ` Andrii Nakryiko 2020-08-02 21:51 ` Jiri Olsa 2020-08-03 14:18 ` Daniel Borkmann
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).