[bionic][PATCH 0/2] add bpftool to linux-tools-common

[Kleber Souza]

On 8/12/19 6:27 PM, Quentin Monnet wrote:
> 2019-07-21 17:36 UTC+0100 ~ Quentin Monnet <quentin.monnet at netronome.com>
>> BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1774815
>>
>> [Impact]
>>
>> bpftool is a debugging and introspection tool for BPF elements, developed by
>> the BPF kernel community. It is essential to list and dump BPF programs and
>> maps loaded on the system. Its sources are located in the kernel repository,
>> and because it is not packaged, administrators willing to use bpftool must
>> download the whole kernel sources, compile and install the utility.
>>
>> [Fix]
>>
>> Adding bpftool to linux-tools and linux-tools-common packages makes it easily
>> accessible. These packages are already use to provide other tools located in
>> the kernel repository, such as perf.
>>
>> Because the bpftool version provided with kernel 4.15 does not build properly
>> (API changed at some point in bfd.h from binutils-dev), backport a patch from
>> 4.16 to fix the calls to libbfd's disassembler.
>>
>> [Testcase]
>>
>> A test linux package was successfully built, at:
>>
>> https://launchpad.net/~qmonnet/+archive/ubuntu/ppa-linux-bpftool
>>
>> (The i386 build actually fails, but it does not seem related to the
>> changes. The amd64 build succeeded.)
>>
>> Packages linux-tools-$(uname -r) and linux-tools-common can be built with
>> "debian/rules binary", and contain bpftool's binary and related files
>> (redirection script, bpftool manual pages, bash completion), respectively.
>>
>> [Regression Potential]
>>
>> Low, as far as I can tell:
>>
>> - The backported patch touches only bpftool and one feature in
>>   tools/build/feature (only used with bpftool), all of it user space tools not
>>   used for anything other than bpftool itself.
>>
>> - bpftool packaging does not change the way other tools are packaged (apart
>>   from creating $(toolsman)/man8 a few lines earlier), and should have no
>>   impact on the packaging of other tools. One dependency is added to
>>   Build-Depends-Indep, none is removed.
>>
>> ---
>> This is my first contribution to ubuntu_kernel, please let me know if I got
>> anything wrong with the process.
>>
>> I would like bpftool to be packaged for bionic and later (supported) releases,
>> if possible. Could someone provide me some guidance on the process, please?
>> Should I also submit the packaging patch for disco/eowan? (As the patch
>> backported in this series is in Linux 4.16, later Ubuntu versions should not
>> need this backport.)
>>
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I am looking forwards to having bpftool packaged on bionic and later
> releases. Is there anything more I can do to help with getting this
> patchset accepted? Please let me know.
> 
> (I am not aware of the usual processing delays for patches on the
> mailing list, please accept my apologies - and tell me - if pinging does
> not feel appropriate.)
> 

Hi Quentin,

Thank you for your contribution to the Ubuntu kernel.

>From what I can tell your submission as a SRU request followed all the
guidelines. However, our rule for this sort of packaging change is that
it needs to be made first in the development series (currently Eoan). This
is so that no newer releases get out of sync and that we have time to test
the changes in the devel series before backporting to a stable series.

I would suggest sending the request again tagging as "[EOAN][UNSTABLE]"
so that the development team can assess this change (I have added them on
CC).


Thank you,

Kleber