lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1608693378-4392-1-git-send-email-jrdr.linux@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 23 Dec 2020 08:46:18 +0530
From:   Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>
To:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>,
        Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Subject: [PATCH] mm: add prototype for __add_to_page_cache_locked()

Otherwise it causes a gcc warning:

../mm/filemap.c:830:14: warning: no previous prototype for
`__add_to_page_cache_locked' [-Wmissing-prototypes]

A previous attempt to make this function static led to compilation
errors when CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF is enabled because
__add_to_page_cache_locked() is referred to by BPF code.

Adding a prototype will silence the warning.

Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>
Cc: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
---
 include/linux/mm.h | 7 +++++++
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
index 5299b90a..c1e9081 100644
--- a/include/linux/mm.h
+++ b/include/linux/mm.h
@@ -216,6 +216,13 @@ int overcommit_kbytes_handler(struct ctl_table *, int, void *, size_t *,
 		loff_t *);
 int overcommit_policy_handler(struct ctl_table *, int, void *, size_t *,
 		loff_t *);
+/*
+ * Any attempt to mark this function as static leads to build failure
+ * when CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF is enabled because __add_to_page_cache_locked()
+ * is referred to by BPF code. This must be visible for error injection.
+ */
+int __add_to_page_cache_locked(struct page *page, struct address_space *mapping,
+		pgoff_t index, gfp_t gfp, void **shadowp);
 
 #define nth_page(page,n) pfn_to_page(page_to_pfn((page)) + (n))
 
-- 
1.9.1

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ