| Message ID | 20210519064116.240536-1-pulehui@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 3a2daa7248647c0e5e165140553f9af5006e93a2 |
| Delegated to: | BPF |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [bpf-next] bpf: Make some symbols static | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| netdev/cover_letter | success | Link |
| netdev/fixes_present | success | Link |
| netdev/patch_count | success | Link |
| netdev/tree_selection | success | Clearly marked for bpf-next |
| netdev/subject_prefix | success | Link |
| netdev/cc_maintainers | success | CCed 10 of 10 maintainers |
| netdev/source_inline | success | Was 0 now: 0 |
| netdev/verify_signedoff | success | Link |
| netdev/module_param | success | Was 0 now: 0 |
| netdev/build_32bit | success | Errors and warnings before: 13 this patch: 11 |
| netdev/kdoc | success | Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0 |
| netdev/verify_fixes | success | Link |
| netdev/checkpatch | success | total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 16 lines checked |
| netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn | success | Errors and warnings before: 13 this patch: 11 |
| netdev/header_inline | success | Link |
> On May 18, 2021, at 11:41 PM, Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com> wrote: > > The sparse tool complains as follows: > > kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4567:29: warning: > symbol 'bpf_sys_bpf_proto' was not declared. Should it be static? > kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4592:29: warning: > symbol 'bpf_sys_close_proto' was not declared. Should it be static? > > This symbol is not used outside of syscall.c, so marks it static. > > Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com> Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com> > --- > kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c > index 2361d97e2c67..73d15bc62d8c 100644 > --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c > +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c > @@ -4564,7 +4564,7 @@ BPF_CALL_3(bpf_sys_bpf, int, cmd, void *, attr, u32, attr_size) > return __sys_bpf(cmd, KERNEL_BPFPTR(attr), attr_size); > } > > -const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_bpf_proto = { > +static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_bpf_proto = { > .func = bpf_sys_bpf, > .gpl_only = false, > .ret_type = RET_INTEGER, > @@ -4589,7 +4589,7 @@ BPF_CALL_1(bpf_sys_close, u32, fd) > return close_fd(fd); > } > > -const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_close_proto = { > +static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_close_proto = { > .func = bpf_sys_close, > .gpl_only = false, > .ret_type = RET_INTEGER, > -- > 2.17.1 >
Hello: This patch was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (refs/heads/master): On Wed, 19 May 2021 14:41:16 +0800 you wrote: > The sparse tool complains as follows: > > kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4567:29: warning: > symbol 'bpf_sys_bpf_proto' was not declared. Should it be static? > kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4592:29: warning: > symbol 'bpf_sys_close_proto' was not declared. Should it be static? > > [...] Here is the summary with links: - [bpf-next] bpf: Make some symbols static https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/3a2daa724864 You are awesome, thank you! -- Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot. https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c index 2361d97e2c67..73d15bc62d8c 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c @@ -4564,7 +4564,7 @@ BPF_CALL_3(bpf_sys_bpf, int, cmd, void *, attr, u32, attr_size) return __sys_bpf(cmd, KERNEL_BPFPTR(attr), attr_size); } -const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_bpf_proto = { +static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_bpf_proto = { .func = bpf_sys_bpf, .gpl_only = false, .ret_type = RET_INTEGER, @@ -4589,7 +4589,7 @@ BPF_CALL_1(bpf_sys_close, u32, fd) return close_fd(fd); } -const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_close_proto = { +static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_close_proto = { .func = bpf_sys_close, .gpl_only = false, .ret_type = RET_INTEGER,
The sparse tool complains as follows: kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4567:29: warning: symbol 'bpf_sys_bpf_proto' was not declared. Should it be static? kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4592:29: warning: symbol 'bpf_sys_close_proto' was not declared. Should it be static? This symbol is not used outside of syscall.c, so marks it static. Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com> --- kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)