netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 21/23] samples/bpf: add new hid

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]

Date:   Wed, 13 Jul 2022 21:06:53 +0900
From:   Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>
To:     Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@...com>,
        Joe Stringer <joe@...ium.io>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Tero Kristo <tero.kristo@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 21/23] samples/bpf: add new hid_mouse example

Benjamin Tissoires wrote on Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 04:58:48PM +0200:
> diff --git a/samples/bpf/hid_mouse.c b/samples/bpf/hid_mouse.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..f6e5f09026eb
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/samples/bpf/hid_mouse.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,150 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> +/* Copyright (c) 2022 Benjamin Tissoires
> + */
> +
> +/* not sure why but this doesn't get preoperly imported */

typo: properly

> +#define __must_check

But more usefully, I don't think it should be needed -- we don't use
__must_check at all in uapi includes; if this is needed that means some
of the include here uses the kernel internal includes and that shouldn't
be needed as they're not normally installed.

Didn't actually try to see but taking the compilation line that fails
and running it with -E will probably show where that must_check comes
from

--
Dominique Martinet | Asmadeus,
just passing by