diff mbox series

[bpf-next,v3,4/6] samples: seccomp: use __BYTE_ORDER__

Message ID 20211026010831.748682-5-iii@linux.ibm.com (mailing list archive)
State Accepted
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series core_reloc fixes for s390 | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR success PR summary
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next success VM_Test
netdev/cover_letter success Series has a cover letter
netdev/fixes_present success Fixes tag not required for -next series
netdev/patch_count success Link
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for bpf-next
netdev/subject_prefix success Link
netdev/cc_maintainers warning 7 maintainers not CCed: john.fastabend@gmail.com yhs@fb.com netdev@vger.kernel.org songliubraving@fb.com kafai@fb.com kpsingh@kernel.org andrii@kernel.org
netdev/source_inline success Was 0 now: 0
netdev/verify_signedoff success Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer
netdev/module_param success Was 0 now: 0
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/verify_fixes success No Fixes tag
netdev/checkpatch success total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 23 lines checked
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/header_inline success No static functions without inline keyword in header files

Commit Message

Ilya Leoshkevich Oct. 26, 2021, 1:08 a.m. UTC
Use the compiler-defined __BYTE_ORDER__ instead of the libc-defined
__BYTE_ORDER for consistency.

Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
---
 samples/seccomp/bpf-helper.h | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/samples/seccomp/bpf-helper.h b/samples/seccomp/bpf-helper.h
index 0cc9816fe8e8..417e48a4c4df 100644
--- a/samples/seccomp/bpf-helper.h
+++ b/samples/seccomp/bpf-helper.h
@@ -62,9 +62,9 @@  void seccomp_bpf_print(struct sock_filter *filter, size_t count);
 #define EXPAND(...) __VA_ARGS__
 
 /* Ensure that we load the logically correct offset. */
-#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
+#if __BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_LITTLE_ENDIAN__
 #define LO_ARG(idx) offsetof(struct seccomp_data, args[(idx)])
-#elif __BYTE_ORDER == __BIG_ENDIAN
+#elif __BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__
 #define LO_ARG(idx) offsetof(struct seccomp_data, args[(idx)]) + sizeof(__u32)
 #else
 #error "Unknown endianness"
@@ -85,10 +85,10 @@  void seccomp_bpf_print(struct sock_filter *filter, size_t count);
 #elif __BITS_PER_LONG == 64
 
 /* Ensure that we load the logically correct offset. */
-#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
+#if __BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_LITTLE_ENDIAN__
 #define ENDIAN(_lo, _hi) _lo, _hi
 #define HI_ARG(idx) offsetof(struct seccomp_data, args[(idx)]) + sizeof(__u32)
-#elif __BYTE_ORDER == __BIG_ENDIAN
+#elif __BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__
 #define ENDIAN(_lo, _hi) _hi, _lo
 #define HI_ARG(idx) offsetof(struct seccomp_data, args[(idx)])
 #endif