| Message ID | 3c00fb8d15d543ae3b5df928c191047145c6b5fe.1663616584.git.dxu@dxuuu.xyz (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Delegated to: | BPF |
| Headers | show |
| Series | bpf: Small nf_conn cleanups | expand |
On 9/19/22 12:44 PM, Daniel Xu wrote: > We're seeing the following new warnings on netdev/build_32bit and > netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn CI jobs: > > ../net/core/filter.c:8608:1: warning: symbol > 'nf_conn_btf_access_lock' was not declared. Should it be static? > ../net/core/filter.c:8611:5: warning: symbol 'nfct_bsa' was not > declared. Should it be static? > > Fix by ensuring extern declaration is present while compiling filter.o. > > Fixes: 864b656f82cc ("bpf: Add support for writing to nf_conn:mark") > Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz> > --- > include/linux/filter.h | 6 ++++++ > include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h | 7 +------ > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/filter.h b/include/linux/filter.h > index 75335432fcbc..98e28126c24b 100644 > --- a/include/linux/filter.h > +++ b/include/linux/filter.h > @@ -567,6 +567,12 @@ struct sk_filter { > > DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(bpf_stats_enabled_key); > > +extern struct mutex nf_conn_btf_access_lock; > +extern int (*nfct_btf_struct_access)(struct bpf_verifier_log *log, const struct btf *btf, > + const struct btf_type *t, int off, int size, > + enum bpf_access_type atype, u32 *next_btf_id, > + enum bpf_type_flag *flag); > + > typedef unsigned int (*bpf_dispatcher_fn)(const void *ctx, > const struct bpf_insn *insnsi, > unsigned int (*bpf_func)(const void *, > diff --git a/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h b/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h > index d1087e4da440..24d1ccc1f8df 100644 > --- a/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h > +++ b/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h > @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ > > #include <linux/bpf.h> > #include <linux/btf.h> > +#include <linux/filter.h> The filter.h is only needed by nf_conntrack_bpf.c? How about moving this include to nf_conntrack_bpf.c. nf_conntrack_bpf.h is included by other conntrack core codes. I would prefer not to spill over unnecessary bpf headers to them. The same goes for the above bpf.h and btf.h which are only needed in nf_conntrack_bpf.c also? > #include <linux/kconfig.h> > #include <linux/mutex.h> Also, is mutex.h still needed? > > @@ -14,12 +15,6 @@ > extern int register_nf_conntrack_bpf(void); > extern void cleanup_nf_conntrack_bpf(void); > > -extern struct mutex nf_conn_btf_access_lock; > -extern int (*nfct_btf_struct_access)(struct bpf_verifier_log *log, const struct btf *btf, > - const struct btf_type *t, int off, int size, > - enum bpf_access_type atype, u32 *next_btf_id, > - enum bpf_type_flag *flag); > - > #else > > static inline int register_nf_conntrack_bpf(void)
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 10:20:47PM -0700, Martin KaFai Lau wrote: > On 9/19/22 12:44 PM, Daniel Xu wrote: > > We're seeing the following new warnings on netdev/build_32bit and > > netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn CI jobs: > > > > ../net/core/filter.c:8608:1: warning: symbol > > 'nf_conn_btf_access_lock' was not declared. Should it be static? > > ../net/core/filter.c:8611:5: warning: symbol 'nfct_bsa' was not > > declared. Should it be static? > > > > Fix by ensuring extern declaration is present while compiling filter.o. > > > > Fixes: 864b656f82cc ("bpf: Add support for writing to nf_conn:mark") > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz> > > --- > > include/linux/filter.h | 6 ++++++ > > include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h | 7 +------ > > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/filter.h b/include/linux/filter.h > > index 75335432fcbc..98e28126c24b 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/filter.h > > +++ b/include/linux/filter.h > > @@ -567,6 +567,12 @@ struct sk_filter { > > DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(bpf_stats_enabled_key); > > +extern struct mutex nf_conn_btf_access_lock; > > +extern int (*nfct_btf_struct_access)(struct bpf_verifier_log *log, const struct btf *btf, > > + const struct btf_type *t, int off, int size, > > + enum bpf_access_type atype, u32 *next_btf_id, > > + enum bpf_type_flag *flag); > > + > > typedef unsigned int (*bpf_dispatcher_fn)(const void *ctx, > > const struct bpf_insn *insnsi, > > unsigned int (*bpf_func)(const void *, > > diff --git a/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h b/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h > > index d1087e4da440..24d1ccc1f8df 100644 > > --- a/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h > > +++ b/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h > > @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ > > #include <linux/bpf.h> > > #include <linux/btf.h> > > +#include <linux/filter.h> > > The filter.h is only needed by nf_conntrack_bpf.c? How about moving this > include to nf_conntrack_bpf.c. nf_conntrack_bpf.h is included by other > conntrack core codes. I would prefer not to spill over unnecessary bpf > headers to them. The same goes for the above bpf.h and btf.h which are only > needed in nf_conntrack_bpf.c also? Ah yeah. Thanks for catching. Will send out a v3. Now I'm wondering if https://include-what-you-use.org/ would work with kernel source. Might give it a try later. > > > #include <linux/kconfig.h> > > #include <linux/mutex.h> > > Also, is mutex.h still needed? Nope. But forgot to send that out in v3. I'll roll it into v4 if we need another respin or otherwise I'll send out a separate patch after. > > > @@ -14,12 +15,6 @@ > > extern int register_nf_conntrack_bpf(void); > > extern void cleanup_nf_conntrack_bpf(void); > > -extern struct mutex nf_conn_btf_access_lock; > > -extern int (*nfct_btf_struct_access)(struct bpf_verifier_log *log, const struct btf *btf, > > - const struct btf_type *t, int off, int size, > > - enum bpf_access_type atype, u32 *next_btf_id, > > - enum bpf_type_flag *flag); > > - > > #else > > static inline int register_nf_conntrack_bpf(void) >
diff --git a/include/linux/filter.h b/include/linux/filter.h index 75335432fcbc..98e28126c24b 100644 --- a/include/linux/filter.h +++ b/include/linux/filter.h @@ -567,6 +567,12 @@ struct sk_filter { DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(bpf_stats_enabled_key); +extern struct mutex nf_conn_btf_access_lock; +extern int (*nfct_btf_struct_access)(struct bpf_verifier_log *log, const struct btf *btf, + const struct btf_type *t, int off, int size, + enum bpf_access_type atype, u32 *next_btf_id, + enum bpf_type_flag *flag); + typedef unsigned int (*bpf_dispatcher_fn)(const void *ctx, const struct bpf_insn *insnsi, unsigned int (*bpf_func)(const void *, diff --git a/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h b/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h index d1087e4da440..24d1ccc1f8df 100644 --- a/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h +++ b/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ #include <linux/bpf.h> #include <linux/btf.h> +#include <linux/filter.h> #include <linux/kconfig.h> #include <linux/mutex.h> @@ -14,12 +15,6 @@ extern int register_nf_conntrack_bpf(void); extern void cleanup_nf_conntrack_bpf(void); -extern struct mutex nf_conn_btf_access_lock; -extern int (*nfct_btf_struct_access)(struct bpf_verifier_log *log, const struct btf *btf, - const struct btf_type *t, int off, int size, - enum bpf_access_type atype, u32 *next_btf_id, - enum bpf_type_flag *flag); - #else static inline int register_nf_conntrack_bpf(void)
We're seeing the following new warnings on netdev/build_32bit and netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn CI jobs: ../net/core/filter.c:8608:1: warning: symbol 'nf_conn_btf_access_lock' was not declared. Should it be static? ../net/core/filter.c:8611:5: warning: symbol 'nfct_bsa' was not declared. Should it be static? Fix by ensuring extern declaration is present while compiling filter.o. Fixes: 864b656f82cc ("bpf: Add support for writing to nf_conn:mark") Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz> --- include/linux/filter.h | 6 ++++++ include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_bpf.h | 7 +------ 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)