Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/2] bpf: support TCP_RTO_MAX_MS for bpf_setsockopt

Philip Li
2025-02-22T01:41:23Z

On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 04:57:08PM +0800, Jason Xing wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 4:52 PM kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jason,
> >
> > kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
> >
> > [auto build test ERROR on bpf-next/master]
> >
> > url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Jason-Xing/bpf-support-TCP_RTO_MAX_MS-for-bpf_setsockopt/20250219-161637
> > base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master
> > patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250219081333.56378-2-kerneljasonxing%40gmail.com
> > patch subject: [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/2] bpf: support TCP_RTO_MAX_MS for bpf_setsockopt
> > config: x86_64-buildonly-randconfig-002-20250220 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250220/202502201843.xA1qZbKX-lkp@intel.com/config)
> > compiler: gcc-12 (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0
> > reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250220/202502201843.xA1qZbKX-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 <lkp@intel.com>
> > | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502201843.xA1qZbKX-lkp@intel.com/
> >
> > All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
> >
> > net/core/filter.c: In function 'sol_tcp_sockopt':
> > >> net/core/filter.c:5385:14: error: 'TCP_RTO_MAX_MS' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 'TCP_RTO_MAX'?
> > 5385 | case TCP_RTO_MAX_MS:
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > | TCP_RTO_MAX
> > net/core/filter.c:5385:14: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
>
> We've discussed this a few hours ago. It turned out to be the wrong
> branch which this series applied to. Please try bpf-next net branch
> instead :)

Thanks for the info, we will configure this branch in the bot side. Sorry
for the false positive.

>
> Thanks,
> Jason
>