netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: fix build by renaming variables

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

Message-ID: <caf893fb-e574-7a67-1e4e-4ce5d7836172@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 17 Dec 2019 09:15:59 +0900
From:   Prashant Bhole <prashantbhole.linux@...il.com>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: fix build by renaming variables



On 12/16/19 11:02 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 5:25 AM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 05:27:38PM +0900, Prashant Bhole wrote:
>>> In btf__align_of() variable name 't' is shadowed by inner block
>>> declaration of another variable with same name. Patch renames
>>> variables in order to fix it.
>>>
>>>    CC       sharedobjs/btf.o
>>> btf.c: In function ‘btf__align_of’:
>>> btf.c:303:21: error: declaration of ‘t’ shadows a previous local [-Werror=shadow]
>>>    303 |   int i, align = 1, t;
>>>        |                     ^
>>> btf.c:283:25: note: shadowed declaration is here
>>>    283 |  const struct btf_type *t = btf__type_by_id(btf, id);
>>>        |
>>>
>>> Fixes: 3d208f4ca111 ("libbpf: Expose btf__align_of() API")
>>> Signed-off-by: Prashant Bhole <prashantbhole.linux@...il.com>
>>
>> Applied, thanks!
> 
> Prashant,
> Thanks for the fixes.
> Which compiler do use?

gcc (GCC) 9.1.1 20190503 (Red Hat 9.1.1-1)

> Sadly I didn't see any of those with my gcc 6.3.0
> Going to upgrade it. Need to decide which one.
>