* Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 6/6] selftests/bpf: Add tests for kfunc register offset checks
[not found] <20220301065745.1634848-7-memxor@gmail.com>
@ 2022-03-01 11:40 ` kernel test robot
2022-03-01 11:57 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: kernel test robot @ 2022-03-01 11:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi, bpf
Cc: llvm, kbuild-all, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann,
Andrii Nakryiko
Hi Kumar,
Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve:
[auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master]
url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Kumar-Kartikeya-Dwivedi/Fixes-for-bad-PTR_TO_BTF_ID-offset/20220301-150010
base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master
config: s390-randconfig-r021-20220301 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220301/202203011937.wMLpkfU3-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: clang version 15.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project d271fc04d5b97b12e6b797c6067d3c96a8d7470e)
reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
# install s390 cross compiling tool for clang build
# apt-get install binutils-s390x-linux-gnu
# https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/37a0d686bce3b71b14a17ae57364ec45d1405b9e
git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
git fetch --no-tags linux-review Kumar-Kartikeya-Dwivedi/Fixes-for-bad-PTR_TO_BTF_ID-offset/20220301-150010
git checkout 37a0d686bce3b71b14a17ae57364ec45d1405b9e
# save the config file to linux build tree
mkdir build_dir
COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=clang make.cross W=1 O=build_dir ARCH=s390 SHELL=/bin/bash net/bpf/
If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
writesl(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count);
~~~~~~~~~~ ^
net/bpf/test_run.c:201:14: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_fentry_test1' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
int noinline bpf_fentry_test1(int a)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:201:1: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
int noinline bpf_fentry_test1(int a)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:208:14: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_fentry_test2' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
int noinline bpf_fentry_test2(int a, u64 b)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:208:1: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
int noinline bpf_fentry_test2(int a, u64 b)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:213:14: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_fentry_test3' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
int noinline bpf_fentry_test3(char a, int b, u64 c)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:213:1: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
int noinline bpf_fentry_test3(char a, int b, u64 c)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:218:14: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_fentry_test4' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
int noinline bpf_fentry_test4(void *a, char b, int c, u64 d)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:218:1: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
int noinline bpf_fentry_test4(void *a, char b, int c, u64 d)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:223:14: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_fentry_test5' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
int noinline bpf_fentry_test5(u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, u64 e)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:223:1: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
int noinline bpf_fentry_test5(u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, u64 e)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:228:14: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_fentry_test6' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
int noinline bpf_fentry_test6(u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, void *e, u64 f)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:228:1: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
int noinline bpf_fentry_test6(u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, void *e, u64 f)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:237:14: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_fentry_test7' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
int noinline bpf_fentry_test7(struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:237:1: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
int noinline bpf_fentry_test7(struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:242:14: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_fentry_test8' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
int noinline bpf_fentry_test8(struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:242:1: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
int noinline bpf_fentry_test8(struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:247:14: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_modify_return_test' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
int noinline bpf_modify_return_test(int a, int *b)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:247:1: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
int noinline bpf_modify_return_test(int a, int *b)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:253:14: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_test1' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
u64 noinline bpf_kfunc_call_test1(struct sock *sk, u32 a, u64 b, u32 c, u64 d)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:253:1: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
u64 noinline bpf_kfunc_call_test1(struct sock *sk, u32 a, u64 b, u32 c, u64 d)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:258:14: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_test2' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
int noinline bpf_kfunc_call_test2(struct sock *sk, u32 a, u32 b)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:258:1: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
int noinline bpf_kfunc_call_test2(struct sock *sk, u32 a, u32 b)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:263:24: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_test3' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
struct sock * noinline bpf_kfunc_call_test3(struct sock *sk)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:263:1: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
struct sock * noinline bpf_kfunc_call_test3(struct sock *sk)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:286:1: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_test_acquire' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
bpf_kfunc_call_test_acquire(unsigned long *scalar_ptr)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:285:10: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
noinline struct prog_test_ref_kfunc *
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:294:15: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_test_release' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_release(struct prog_test_ref_kfunc *p)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:294:10: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_release(struct prog_test_ref_kfunc *p)
^
static
>> net/bpf/test_run.c:298:15: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_memb_release' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_memb_release(struct prog_test_member *p)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:298:10: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_memb_release(struct prog_test_member *p)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:340:15: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_test_pass_ctx' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_pass_ctx(struct __sk_buff *skb)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:340:10: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_pass_ctx(struct __sk_buff *skb)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:344:15: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_test_pass1' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_pass1(struct prog_test_pass1 *p)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:344:10: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_pass1(struct prog_test_pass1 *p)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:348:15: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_test_pass2' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_pass2(struct prog_test_pass2 *p)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:348:10: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_pass2(struct prog_test_pass2 *p)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:352:15: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_test_fail1' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_fail1(struct prog_test_fail1 *p)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:352:10: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_fail1(struct prog_test_fail1 *p)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:356:15: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_test_fail2' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_fail2(struct prog_test_fail2 *p)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:356:10: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_fail2(struct prog_test_fail2 *p)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:360:15: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_test_fail3' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_fail3(struct prog_test_fail3 *p)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:360:10: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_fail3(struct prog_test_fail3 *p)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:364:15: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_test_mem_len_pass1' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_mem_len_pass1(void *mem, int mem__sz)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:364:10: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_mem_len_pass1(void *mem, int mem__sz)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:368:15: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_test_mem_len_fail1' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_mem_len_fail1(void *mem, int len)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:368:10: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_mem_len_fail1(void *mem, int len)
^
static
net/bpf/test_run.c:372:15: warning: no previous prototype for function 'bpf_kfunc_call_test_mem_len_fail2' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_mem_len_fail2(u64 *mem, int len)
^
net/bpf/test_run.c:372:10: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_mem_len_fail2(u64 *mem, int len)
^
static
36 warnings generated.
vim +/bpf_kfunc_call_memb_release +298 net/bpf/test_run.c
297
> 298 noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_memb_release(struct prog_test_member *p)
299 {
300 }
301
---
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation
https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all@lists.01.org
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 6/6] selftests/bpf: Add tests for kfunc register offset checks
2022-03-01 11:40 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 6/6] selftests/bpf: Add tests for kfunc register offset checks kernel test robot
@ 2022-03-01 11:57 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-02 22:47 ` Alexei Starovoitov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi @ 2022-03-01 11:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kernel test robot
Cc: bpf, llvm, kbuild-all, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann,
Andrii Nakryiko
On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 05:10:31PM IST, kernel test robot wrote:
> Hi Kumar,
>
> Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve:
>
> [auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master]
>
> url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Kumar-Kartikeya-Dwivedi/Fixes-for-bad-PTR_TO_BTF_ID-offset/20220301-150010
> base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master
> config: s390-randconfig-r021-20220301 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220301/202203011937.wMLpkfU3-lkp@intel.com/config)
> compiler: clang version 15.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project d271fc04d5b97b12e6b797c6067d3c96a8d7470e)
The same warning is emitted on clang for all existing definitions, so I can
respin with a fix for the warning like we do for GCC, otherwise it can also
be a follow up patch.
> [...]
--
Kartikeya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 6/6] selftests/bpf: Add tests for kfunc register offset checks
2022-03-01 11:57 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
@ 2022-03-02 22:47 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-02 23:14 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2022-03-02 22:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
Cc: kernel test robot, bpf, llvm, kbuild-all, Alexei Starovoitov,
Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 3:57 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 05:10:31PM IST, kernel test robot wrote:
> > Hi Kumar,
> >
> > Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve:
> >
> > [auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master]
> >
> > url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Kumar-Kartikeya-Dwivedi/Fixes-for-bad-PTR_TO_BTF_ID-offset/20220301-150010
> > base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master
> > config: s390-randconfig-r021-20220301 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220301/202203011937.wMLpkfU3-lkp@intel.com/config)
> > compiler: clang version 15.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project d271fc04d5b97b12e6b797c6067d3c96a8d7470e)
>
> The same warning is emitted on clang for all existing definitions, so I can
> respin with a fix for the warning like we do for GCC, otherwise it can also
> be a follow up patch.
Separate patch is fine.
How do you plan on fixing it?
What is __diag_ignore equivalent for clang?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 6/6] selftests/bpf: Add tests for kfunc register offset checks
2022-03-02 22:47 ` Alexei Starovoitov
@ 2022-03-02 23:14 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-02 23:20 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-02 23:26 ` Nathan Chancellor
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi @ 2022-03-02 23:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexei Starovoitov
Cc: kernel test robot, bpf, llvm, kbuild-all, Alexei Starovoitov,
Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko
On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 04:17:25AM IST, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 3:57 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 05:10:31PM IST, kernel test robot wrote:
> > > Hi Kumar,
> > >
> > > Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve:
> > >
> > > [auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master]
> > >
> > > url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Kumar-Kartikeya-Dwivedi/Fixes-for-bad-PTR_TO_BTF_ID-offset/20220301-150010
> > > base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master
> > > config: s390-randconfig-r021-20220301 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220301/202203011937.wMLpkfU3-lkp@intel.com/config)
> > > compiler: clang version 15.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project d271fc04d5b97b12e6b797c6067d3c96a8d7470e)
> >
> > The same warning is emitted on clang for all existing definitions, so I can
> > respin with a fix for the warning like we do for GCC, otherwise it can also
> > be a follow up patch.
>
> Separate patch is fine.
> How do you plan on fixing it?
> What is __diag_ignore equivalent for clang?
Hmm, looks like I'll have to add those in include/linux/compiler-clang.h. Quick
local testing suggests it will work with _Pragma("clang diagnostic ignored ...").
--
Kartikeya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 6/6] selftests/bpf: Add tests for kfunc register offset checks
2022-03-02 23:14 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
@ 2022-03-02 23:20 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-02 23:26 ` Nathan Chancellor
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2022-03-02 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
Cc: kernel test robot, bpf, llvm, kbuild-all, Alexei Starovoitov,
Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 3:14 PM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 04:17:25AM IST, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 3:57 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 05:10:31PM IST, kernel test robot wrote:
> > > > Hi Kumar,
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve:
> > > >
> > > > [auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master]
> > > >
> > > > url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Kumar-Kartikeya-Dwivedi/Fixes-for-bad-PTR_TO_BTF_ID-offset/20220301-150010
> > > > base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master
> > > > config: s390-randconfig-r021-20220301 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220301/202203011937.wMLpkfU3-lkp@intel.com/config)
> > > > compiler: clang version 15.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project d271fc04d5b97b12e6b797c6067d3c96a8d7470e)
> > >
> > > The same warning is emitted on clang for all existing definitions, so I can
> > > respin with a fix for the warning like we do for GCC, otherwise it can also
> > > be a follow up patch.
> >
> > Separate patch is fine.
> > How do you plan on fixing it?
> > What is __diag_ignore equivalent for clang?
>
> Hmm, looks like I'll have to add those in include/linux/compiler-clang.h. Quick
> local testing suggests it will work with _Pragma("clang diagnostic ignored ...").
Make a generic llvm/gcc #define for
__diag_ignore(GCC, 8, "-Wmissing-prototypes" ?
We need it in two places so far.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 6/6] selftests/bpf: Add tests for kfunc register offset checks
2022-03-02 23:14 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-02 23:20 ` Alexei Starovoitov
@ 2022-03-02 23:26 ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-03-02 23:37 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Nathan Chancellor @ 2022-03-02 23:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov, kernel test robot, bpf, llvm, kbuild-all,
Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko
On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 04:44:01AM +0530, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 04:17:25AM IST, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 3:57 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 05:10:31PM IST, kernel test robot wrote:
> > > > Hi Kumar,
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve:
> > > >
> > > > [auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master]
> > > >
> > > > url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Kumar-Kartikeya-Dwivedi/Fixes-for-bad-PTR_TO_BTF_ID-offset/20220301-150010
> > > > base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master
> > > > config: s390-randconfig-r021-20220301 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220301/202203011937.wMLpkfU3-lkp@intel.com/config)
> > > > compiler: clang version 15.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project d271fc04d5b97b12e6b797c6067d3c96a8d7470e)
> > >
> > > The same warning is emitted on clang for all existing definitions, so I can
> > > respin with a fix for the warning like we do for GCC, otherwise it can also
> > > be a follow up patch.
> >
> > Separate patch is fine.
> > How do you plan on fixing it?
> > What is __diag_ignore equivalent for clang?
>
> Hmm, looks like I'll have to add those in include/linux/compiler-clang.h. Quick
> local testing suggests it will work with _Pragma("clang diagnostic ignored ...").
I have a diff that mirrors the GCC infrastructure, which should work for
this, feel free to copy it:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210310225240.4epj2mdmzt4vurr3@archlinux-ax161/
If you want to shut up the warning for all supported versions of clang,
switch 130000 for 110000 and __diag_clang_11() for __diag_clang_13().
Cheers,
Nathan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 6/6] selftests/bpf: Add tests for kfunc register offset checks
2022-03-02 23:26 ` Nathan Chancellor
@ 2022-03-02 23:37 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi @ 2022-03-02 23:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nathan Chancellor
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov, kernel test robot, bpf, llvm, kbuild-all,
Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko
On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 04:56:37AM IST, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 04:44:01AM +0530, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 04:17:25AM IST, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 3:57 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 05:10:31PM IST, kernel test robot wrote:
> > > > > Hi Kumar,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve:
> > > > >
> > > > > [auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master]
> > > > >
> > > > > url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Kumar-Kartikeya-Dwivedi/Fixes-for-bad-PTR_TO_BTF_ID-offset/20220301-150010
> > > > > base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master
> > > > > config: s390-randconfig-r021-20220301 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220301/202203011937.wMLpkfU3-lkp@intel.com/config)
> > > > > compiler: clang version 15.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project d271fc04d5b97b12e6b797c6067d3c96a8d7470e)
> > > >
> > > > The same warning is emitted on clang for all existing definitions, so I can
> > > > respin with a fix for the warning like we do for GCC, otherwise it can also
> > > > be a follow up patch.
> > >
> > > Separate patch is fine.
> > > How do you plan on fixing it?
> > > What is __diag_ignore equivalent for clang?
> >
> > Hmm, looks like I'll have to add those in include/linux/compiler-clang.h. Quick
> > local testing suggests it will work with _Pragma("clang diagnostic ignored ...").
>
> I have a diff that mirrors the GCC infrastructure, which should work for
> this, feel free to copy it:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210310225240.4epj2mdmzt4vurr3@archlinux-ax161/
>
> If you want to shut up the warning for all supported versions of clang,
> switch 130000 for 110000 and __diag_clang_11() for __diag_clang_13().
>
That's great, Nathan! I'll add your Signed-off-by to it.
> Cheers,
> Nathan
--
Kartikeya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-03-02 23:38 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20220301065745.1634848-7-memxor@gmail.com>
2022-03-01 11:40 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 6/6] selftests/bpf: Add tests for kfunc register offset checks kernel test robot
2022-03-01 11:57 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-02 22:47 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-02 23:14 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-02 23:20 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-02 23:26 ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-03-02 23:37 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox