Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, docs: Update pahole to 1.28 for selftests

[Andrii Nakryiko]

On Sat, Jan 3, 2026 at 1:11 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 02, 2026 at 07:33:50AM -0800, Ihor Solodrai wrote:
> > On 1/2/26 3:13 AM, Hemanth Malla wrote:
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst b/Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst
> > > index 0acb4c9b8d90..3a147b6c780e 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst
> > > +++ b/Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst
> > > @@ -482,7 +482,7 @@ under test should match the config file fragment in
> > >  tools/testing/selftests/bpf as closely as possible.
> > >
> > >  Finally to ensure support for latest BPF Type Format features -
> > > -discussed in Documentation/bpf/btf.rst - pahole version 1.16
> > > +discussed in Documentation/bpf/btf.rst - pahole version 1.28
> >
> > Hi Hemanth, thanks for the patch.
> >
> > Acked-by: Ihor Solodrai <ihor.solodrai@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > 1.28 is needed for --distilled_base [1], which is only a requirement
> > for tests using modules. Many other tests are likely to work with
> > older versions, but the minimum for the kernel build is 1.22 now [2].
> >
> > Not sure if it's worth it to add this nuance to the QA doc, although
> > in general we should recommend people running the selftests to use the
> > latest pahole release. Maybe add a comment?
>
> I guess minimum pahole version can be added to
> Documentation/process/changes.rst.

pahole 1.22 is already specified in Documentation/process/changes.rst

>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara