Re: [PATCH] selftests/nolibc: add tests for multi-object linkage

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 09:23:29AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> Hi Willy, Paul,
> 
> On 2023-10-12 09:06:33+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 01:13:37AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > > While uncommon, nolibc executables can be linked together from multiple
> > > compilation units.
> > > Add some tests to make sure everything works in that case.
> > (...)
> 
> [..]
> 
> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > Note:
> > > 
> > > This depends on path "tools/nolibc: mark start_c as weak".
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231012-nolibc-start_c-multiple-v1-1-fbfc73e0283f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > 
> > For these two patches: Acked-by: Willy Tarreau <w@xxxxxx>
> 
> Thanks, applied locally.
> 
> I guess the linked patch "tools/nolibc: mark start_c as weak" should
> also go into nolibc/fixes.
> 
> @Paul, would it introduce too much churn for you if I submit another
> nolibc pull with an updated nolibc/fixes?
> (And the rebased nolibc/next with this commit while we are at it)

Not a problem this week!

But after about Wednesday of next week, getting things into the upcoming
merge window is pretty much as fast as sending them quickly to Linus,
if that makes sense.  Unless there is to be a -rc8 this time, but I
have heard no sign of that.

Make sense?

							Thanx, Paul