netdev - [PATCH] net: bpf: Fix kernel coding style

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

Message-Id: <20250730105019.436235-1-lijun01@kylinos.cn>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2025 18:50:19 +0800
From: Li Jun <lijun01@...inos.cn>
To: lijun01@...inos.cn,
	ast@...nel.org,
	daniel@...earbox.net,
	andrii@...nel.org,
	davem@...emloft.net,
	edumazet@...gle.com,
	kuba@...nel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com,
	bpf@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] net: bpf: Fix kernel coding style

'noinlne' after 'int' cause
"ERROR: inline keyword should sit between storage class and type"
by checkpatch.pl

- Standardize function declaration style by moving 'noinline' modifier
- Fix asm volatile statement formatting

Signed-off-by: Li Jun <lijun01@...inos.cn>
---
 net/bpf/test_run.c | 22 +++++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/bpf/test_run.c b/net/bpf/test_run.c
index 9728dbd4c66c..4a862d605386 100644
--- a/net/bpf/test_run.c
+++ b/net/bpf/test_run.c
@@ -524,27 +524,27 @@ __bpf_kfunc int bpf_fentry_test1(int a)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(bpf_fentry_test1);
 
-int noinline bpf_fentry_test2(int a, u64 b)
+noinline int bpf_fentry_test2(int a, u64 b)
 {
 	return a + b;
 }
 
-int noinline bpf_fentry_test3(char a, int b, u64 c)
+noinline int bpf_fentry_test3(char a, int b, u64 c)
 {
 	return a + b + c;
 }
 
-int noinline bpf_fentry_test4(void *a, char b, int c, u64 d)
+noinline int bpf_fentry_test4(void *a, char b, int c, u64 d)
 {
 	return (long)a + b + c + d;
 }
 
-int noinline bpf_fentry_test5(u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, u64 e)
+noinline int bpf_fentry_test5(u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, u64 e)
 {
 	return a + (long)b + c + d + e;
 }
 
-int noinline bpf_fentry_test6(u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, void *e, u64 f)
+noinline int bpf_fentry_test6(u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, void *e, u64 f)
 {
 	return a + (long)b + c + d + (long)e + f;
 }
@@ -553,13 +553,13 @@ struct bpf_fentry_test_t {
 	struct bpf_fentry_test_t *a;
 };
 
-int noinline bpf_fentry_test7(struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
+noinline int bpf_fentry_test7(struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
 {
-	asm volatile ("": "+r"(arg));
+	asm volatile ("" : "+r"(arg));
 	return (long)arg;
 }
 
-int noinline bpf_fentry_test8(struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
+noinline int bpf_fentry_test8(struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
 {
 	return (long)arg->a;
 }
@@ -569,12 +569,12 @@ __bpf_kfunc u32 bpf_fentry_test9(u32 *a)
 	return *a;
 }
 
-int noinline bpf_fentry_test10(const void *a)
+noinline int bpf_fentry_test10(const void *a)
 {
 	return (long)a;
 }
 
-void noinline bpf_fentry_test_sinfo(struct skb_shared_info *sinfo)
+noinline void bpf_fentry_test_sinfo(struct skb_shared_info *sinfo)
 {
 }
 
@@ -598,7 +598,7 @@ __bpf_kfunc int bpf_modify_return_test_tp(int nonce)
 	return nonce;
 }
 
-int noinline bpf_fentry_shadow_test(int a)
+noinline int bpf_fentry_shadow_test(int a)
 {
 	return a + 1;
 }
-- 
2.25.1