[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgQ_MNipb2fOSDmXJ9tYko8OhzA0fPueR-kh6eYT_MbDg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 19:12:04 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Haslam <jonathan.haslam@...il.com>, Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@...il.com>,
Stephen Brennan <stephen.s.brennan@...cle.com>, Ye Bin <yebin10@...wei.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] probes updates for v6.10
On Wed, 15 May 2024 at 17:52, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Probes updates for v6.10:
Grr,
This doesn't even build right.
Yes, it builds cleanly in an allmoconfig build, which is what I did
before I pushed out.
But after pushing out, I notice that it doesn't build in more limited
configurations and with clang, because:
> Stephen Brennan (1):
> kprobe/ftrace: bail out if ftrace was killed
This is no longer valid C code, and hasn't been for a long long while:
void kprobe_ftrace_kill()
{
kprobe_ftrace_disabled = true;
}
we require proper prototypes, not some ancient per-ANSI K&R syntax.
It turns out that gcc apparently still accepts these things, but it
really shouldn't. But with a clang build, you get a big error:
kernel/kprobes.c:1140:24: error: a function declaration without a
prototype is deprecated in all versions of C
[-Werror,-Wstrict-prototypes]
and the reason it didn't get noticed in -next is that this commit had
apparently not *been* in linux-next.
Dammit, that's now how any of this is supposed to work.
Why was this untested crap sent to me?
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists