[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzYG2f=S7Qz4v+fTv=mg3v3DLZ5aS+9Y83LAWhXaTRqALg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2022 09:23:05 -0800
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To: Mauricio Vásquez Bernal <mauricio@...volk.io>
Cc: Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Quentin Monnet <quentin@...valent.com>,
Rafael David Tinoco <rafaeldtinoco@...il.com>,
Lorenzo Fontana <lorenzo.fontana@...stic.co>,
Leonardo Di Donato <leonardo.didonato@...stic.co>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v5 3/9] bpftool: Implement btf_save_raw()
On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 8:07 AM Mauricio Vásquez Bernal
<mauricio@...volk.io> wrote:
>
> > The logic looks good, but you need to merge adding this static
> > function with the patch that's using that static function. Otherwise
> > you will break bisectability because compiler will warn about unused
> > static function.
> >
>
> It only emits a warning but it compiles fine. Is that still an issue?
Yes, it breaks selftests build (warnings are treated as errors for
bpftool, it seems).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists