Aha, that was just released. Nice. I'll report this to the issue tracker where
I had lodged the bpf patches for QoL use when testing rc4 and older.
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021, at 5:26 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 2:28 AM Christopher William Snowhill
> wrote:
> >
> > When is thi
On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 2:28 AM Christopher William Snowhill
wrote:
>
> When is this being applied to an actual kernel? 5.11 is still quite broken
> without these two patches. Unless you're not using a vfat EFI partition, I
> guess.
>
It's in v5.11-rc5.
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021, at 12:20 PM, pat
When is this being applied to an actual kernel? 5.11 is still quite broken
without these two patches. Unless you're not using a vfat EFI partition, I
guess.
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021, at 12:20 PM, patchwork-bot+netdev...@kernel.org wrote:
> Hello:
>
> This series was applied to bpf/bpf.git (refs/hea
Hello:
This series was applied to bpf/bpf.git (refs/heads/master):
On Sat, 9 Jan 2021 23:03:40 -0800 you wrote:
> Some modules don't declare any new types and end up with an empty BTF,
> containing only valid BTF header and no types or strings sections. This
> currently causes BTF validation erro
On 1/9/21 11:03 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
Some modules don't declare any new types and end up with an empty BTF,
containing only valid BTF header and no types or strings sections. This
currently causes BTF validation error. There is nothing wrong with such BTF,
so fix the issue by allowing mo
Some modules don't declare any new types and end up with an empty BTF,
containing only valid BTF header and no types or strings sections. This
currently causes BTF validation error. There is nothing wrong with such BTF,
so fix the issue by allowing module BTFs with no types or strings.
Reported-by
