On Wed, 2025-07-02 at 10:28 -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: [...] > Ok, if I'm the only one who thinks we shouldn't duplicate kfunc > definitions because we have an established approach that works, so be > it, not such a big deal. > > I'm curious to see if the next step would be someone asking to do > something about enum or struct that is defined only with some kernel > configuration that selftest relies on. Are we going to add extra > #defines just to be able to do #ifndef-#define-#endif guarding in > selftest source code just to accommodate someone wanting to build BPF > selftests, but not wanting to follow prescribed build setup? Or start > adding feature detection in Makefile and exclude some tests from being > built? Will that start to be a maintenance burden? In my personal opinion adding #ifndef-#define-#endif and feature detection in the makefile would constitute maintenance burden, yes. > I guess I just don't understand the direction here.
