[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAADnVQJT8nOiiX90g3Pm7Ud0hzBBjBOQmPtPV1iwUYKMcuBFig@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 20:02:28 -0800
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: runtime warnings after merge of the bpf-next tree
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 7:55 PM Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz> wrote:
>
>
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/btf_ids.h b/include/linux/btf_ids.h
> index 0fe4f1cd1918..e24aabfe8ecc 100644
> --- a/include/linux/btf_ids.h
> +++ b/include/linux/btf_ids.h
> @@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ BTF_SET8_END(name)
> #define BTF_SET_END(name)
> #define BTF_SET8_START(name) static struct btf_id_set8 __maybe_unused name = { 0 };
> #define BTF_SET8_END(name)
> -#define BTF_KFUNCS_START(name) static struct btf_id_set8 __maybe_unused name = { 0 };
> +#define BTF_KFUNCS_START(name) static struct btf_id_set8 __maybe_unused name = { .flags = BTF_SET8_KFUNCS };
> #define BTF_KFUNCS_END(name)
Most likely you're correct.
Force pushed bpf-next with this fix.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists