From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30D521372; Thu, 10 Apr 2025 05:37:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.9 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744263481; cv=none; b=DtG4EIJL8gZqLn53hkh4AuNW+J3/kgHm1bZum42pMc9aaCvS0aYACBsiMzJWAIm+GIHhEA3h714CqYdosfC0olI4SrzgUm9uXW5VYAJsRklh3HPZ/sDfRvvPkQrTx5zBo4tyqXPvgScC/VmPw8B8Moj8vMw4iSLKPOMn6gvHgr0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744263481; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9P+OL6icH0gotmK3pNM6A6PfTMy13MtkpH72Q3bkxmo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Uw+s+KSRcrkpjB+RK35UHo7269mbTNJ9upWCbHomcS+YW0wtnQpbGezlqWixSbzxT17IOJu9xhV3KTxk8zaQ5x9Wmi68zOqDglZg3hnHGPu8KuSFGEJH/OlYsZc+yCqgrWumkVrPh0XCFPV5iPAKPIFxQDbNw8vqbJZwR1OuzFY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=D3uMI/q2; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.9 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="D3uMI/q2" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1744263477; x=1775799477; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=9P+OL6icH0gotmK3pNM6A6PfTMy13MtkpH72Q3bkxmo=; b=D3uMI/q20JA1+vej7I2tVj6JFpy52/gJxOIoquqBhw4xH9FX8M3fMcOS v41W0zF6MetbUgfOHffOfHyFg5xp1i1aWX1j4yAx1/wI9OxycKbU70LYb JR0wAMO7RNIixo5O/w7vJKtQUgx5y0fOAAZTLvmL6jPb3vic8vUgGZM/c xzcbJ6tZHhKlS1AZJdooJHfukWf64Jn/2dZ/EUgHbvO76iIBvVNtkI5vm PT3Msf7J67CYUi+6afoH2owI//mHLrKqY+HkQfLTJo6jrGgpbKM4PWEng CmcQTC8xtw6r5fGnv6WOWgpwsIbuhpGW6u/OML96VpJmArQN1ezKmKZRb A==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: iZoWUrYQSF2jHhmAi8ShuA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: eYBNCVsXTWKb85+/+UMK/A== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11399"; a="68248867" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,202,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="68248867" Received: from fmviesa004.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.144]) by orvoesa101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Apr 2025 22:37:57 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: gsQTWaKeTsCC+p6EUXxGRg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: bNsDITTlTO2F58SUEi5HLg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,202,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="133903701" Received: from lkp-server01.sh.intel.com (HELO b207828170a5) ([10.239.97.150]) by fmviesa004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 Apr 2025 22:37:56 -0700 Received: from kbuild by b207828170a5 with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1u2kbp-0009dr-0x; Thu, 10 Apr 2025 05:37:53 +0000 Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 13:37:09 +0800 From: kernel test robot To: Daniel Xu Cc: llvm@lists.linux.dev, oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [RFC bpf-next 06/13] bpf: Move kfunc definitions out of verifier.c Message-ID: <202504101343.eRiCSJes-lkp@intel.com> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: llvm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Hi Daniel, [This is a private test report for your RFC patch.] kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings: [auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Daniel-Xu/bpf-Move-bpf_prog_ctx_arg_info_init-body-into-header/20250409-114116 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/c73f939de0f6af022e009dda057b6f941c6fce59.1744169424.git.dxu%40dxuuu.xyz patch subject: [RFC bpf-next 06/13] bpf: Move kfunc definitions out of verifier.c config: arm64-randconfig-002-20250410 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250410/202504101343.eRiCSJes-lkp@intel.com/config) compiler: clang version 21.0.0git (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 92c93f5286b9ff33f27ff694d2dc33da1c07afdd) reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250410/202504101343.eRiCSJes-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags | Reported-by: kernel test robot | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202504101343.eRiCSJes-lkp@intel.com/ All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): kernel/bpf/core.c:320:9: error: call to undeclared function 'btf_distill_func_proto'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] 320 | ret = btf_distill_func_proto(log, btf, t, tname, &tgt_info->fmodel); | ^ kernel/bpf/core.c:339:7: error: call to undeclared function 'btf_check_type_match'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] 339 | btf_check_type_match(log, prog, btf, t)) | ^ kernel/bpf/core.c:396:19: error: call to undeclared function 'btf_kfunc_is_modify_return'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] 396 | u32 *flags = btf_kfunc_is_modify_return(btf, btf_id, | ^ kernel/bpf/core.c:396:11: error: incompatible integer to pointer conversion initializing 'u32 *' (aka 'unsigned int *') with an expression of type 'int' [-Wint-conversion] 396 | u32 *flags = btf_kfunc_is_modify_return(btf, btf_id, | ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 397 | prog); | ~~~~~ kernel/bpf/core.c:425:8: error: call to undeclared function 'btf_kfunc_is_modify_return'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] 425 | if (btf_kfunc_is_modify_return(btf, btf_id, prog) || | ^ kernel/bpf/core.c:1638:33: error: use of undeclared identifier 'kfunc_desc_cmp_by_id_off' 1638 | sizeof(tab->descs[0]), kfunc_desc_cmp_by_id_off); | ^ >> kernel/bpf/core.c:1628:1: warning: no previous prototype for function 'find_kfunc_desc' [-Wmissing-prototypes] 1628 | find_kfunc_desc(const struct bpf_prog *prog, u32 func_id, u16 offset) | ^ kernel/bpf/core.c:1627:7: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit 1627 | const struct bpf_kfunc_desc * | ^ | static kernel/bpf/core.c:1642:5: error: redefinition of 'bpf_get_kfunc_addr' 1642 | int bpf_get_kfunc_addr(const struct bpf_prog *prog, u32 func_id, | ^ include/linux/bpf.h:3084:1: note: previous definition is here 3084 | bpf_get_kfunc_addr(const struct bpf_prog *prog, u32 func_id, | ^ 1 warning and 7 errors generated. vim +/find_kfunc_desc +1628 kernel/bpf/core.c 1626 1627 const struct bpf_kfunc_desc * > 1628 find_kfunc_desc(const struct bpf_prog *prog, u32 func_id, u16 offset) 1629 { 1630 struct bpf_kfunc_desc desc = { 1631 .func_id = func_id, 1632 .offset = offset, 1633 }; 1634 struct bpf_kfunc_desc_tab *tab; 1635 1636 tab = prog->aux->kfunc_tab; 1637 return bsearch(&desc, tab->descs, tab->nr_descs, 1638 sizeof(tab->descs[0]), kfunc_desc_cmp_by_id_off); 1639 } 1640 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(find_kfunc_desc); 1641 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki