netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Fix build error without CONFIG

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20191018184629.GD26267@pc-63.home>
Date:   Fri, 18 Oct 2019 20:46:29 +0200
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "ast@...nel.org" <ast@...nel.org>, Martin Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Fix build error without CONFIG_NET

On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 02:20:25PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Oct 2019 18:11:07 +0000
> Yonghong Song <yhs@...com> wrote:
> > On 10/18/19 2:03 AM, YueHaibing wrote:
> > > If CONFIG_NET is n, building fails:
> > > 
> > > kernel/trace/bpf_trace.o: In function `raw_tp_prog_func_proto':
> > > bpf_trace.c:(.text+0x1a34): undefined reference to `bpf_skb_output_proto'
> > > 
> > > Wrap it into a #ifdef to fix this.
> > > 
> > > Reported-by: Hulk Robot <hulkci@...wei.com>
> > > Fixes: a7658e1a4164 ("bpf: Check types of arguments passed into helpers")
> > > Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>  
> > 
> > Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
> 
> I'm getting ready for another push to Linus. Want me to pull this into
> my tree?

It's related to bpf-next, so only bpf-next is appropriate here. We'll
take it.

Thanks,
Daniel