On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 5:39 PM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
[off-list ref] wrote:

Em Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 03:52:28PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski escreveu:

quoted

On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:10:30 -0800, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:

quoted

We are using this script with python2.7, works just fine :-)
So maybe doing s/python3/python/ is the way to go, whatever
default python is installed, it should work with that.

quoted

That increases the risk someone will make a python2-only change
and break Python 3.

quoted

Python 2 is dead, I'm honestly surprised this needs to be said :)

It shouldn't have to be said, and probably it is old school to try and
keep things portable when there is no need to use new stuff for simple
tasks like this.

Anyway, it seems its just a matter of adding the python3 package to the
old container images and then most of them will work with what is in
that script, what doesn't work is really old and then NO_LIBBPF=1 is the
way to go.

In the end, kinda nothing to see here, go back to adding cool new stuff,
lets not hold eBPF from progressing ;-P

Absolutely. I think if some distro is still using 32-bit userland it's likely
so much behind anything modern that its kernel is equally old too
and appeal of new features (bpf or anything else) is probably low.
So if I were you I would keep 32-bit builds of perf supported, but with
minimal effort.

Re: patch itself.
I can take it as-is into bpf tree and it will be in Linus's tree in few days.
Or I can take only tools/lib/bpf/Makefile hunk and you can take
tools/perf/MANIFEST via perf tree?
Whichever way is fine.