Re: [PATCH v2] bpf: fix build warning - missing prototype
From: Alexei Starovoitov <hidden>
Date: 2020-03-26 23:54:34
Also in:
bpf, kernel-janitors, lkml
On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 08:22:31AM +0100, Jean-Philippe Menil wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Fix build warnings when building net/bpf/test_run.o with W=1 due to missing prototype for bpf_fentry_test{1..6}. Declare prototypes in order to silence warnings. Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Menil <redacted> --- net/bpf/test_run.c | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)diff --git a/net/bpf/test_run.c b/net/bpf/test_run.c index d555c0d8657d..cdf87fb0b6eb 100644 --- a/net/bpf/test_run.c +++ b/net/bpf/test_run.c@@ -113,31 +113,37 @@ static int bpf_test_finish(const union bpf_attr *kattr, * architecture dependent calling conventions. 7+ can be supported in the * future. */ +int noinline bpf_fentry_test1(int a); int noinline bpf_fentry_test1(int a) { return a + 1; } +int noinline bpf_fentry_test2(int a, u64 b); int noinline bpf_fentry_test2(int a, u64 b) { return a + b; } +int noinline bpf_fentry_test3(char a, int b, u64 c); int noinline bpf_fentry_test3(char a, int b, u64 c) { return a + b + c; } +int noinline bpf_fentry_test4(void *a, char b, int c, u64 d); int noinline bpf_fentry_test4(void *a, char b, int c, u64 d) { return (long)a + b + c + d; } +int noinline bpf_fentry_test5(u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, u64 e); int noinline bpf_fentry_test5(u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, u64 e) { return a + (long)b + c + d + e; } +int noinline bpf_fentry_test6(u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, void *e, u64 f); int noinline bpf_fentry_test6(u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, void *e, u64 f)
That's a bit too much of "watery water". Have you considered __diag_push(); __diag_ignore(GCC, "-Wwhatever specific flag will shut up this warn") __diag_pop(); approach ? It will be self documenting as well.