diff mbox series

[bpf-next,v2] selftests/bpf: Fix conflicts with built-in functions in bpf_iter_ksym

Message ID 20221203010847.2191265-1-james.hilliard1@gmail.com (mailing list archive)
State Accepted
Commit ab0350c743d5c93fd88742f02b3dff12168ab435
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series [bpf-next,v2] selftests/bpf: Fix conflicts with built-in functions in bpf_iter_ksym | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for bpf-next
netdev/fixes_present success Fixes tag not required for -next series
netdev/subject_prefix success Link
netdev/cover_letter success Single patches do not need cover letters
netdev/patch_count success Link
netdev/header_inline success No static functions without inline keyword in header files
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/cc_maintainers success CCed 17 of 17 maintainers
netdev/build_clang success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/module_param success Was 0 now: 0
netdev/verify_signedoff success Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer
netdev/check_selftest success No net selftest shell script
netdev/verify_fixes success No Fixes tag
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/checkpatch success total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 24 lines checked
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/source_inline warning Was 2 now: 2
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-11 fail Logs for test_maps on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-3 success Logs for build for aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-9 success Logs for test_maps on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-13 success Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-19 fail Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-22 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-23 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-27 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-28 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-32 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-33 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-37 success Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-38 success Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-10 success Logs for test_maps on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-12 success Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-14 success Logs for test_progs on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-15 success Logs for test_progs on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-17 success Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-18 success Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-20 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-24 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-25 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-29 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-30 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-34 success Logs for test_verifier on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-35 success Logs for test_verifier on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-26 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-36 success Logs for test_verifier on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-31 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-16 success Logs for test_progs on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-21 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR success PR summary
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-8 success Logs for set-matrix
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-1 success Logs for build for aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-2 success Logs for build for aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-4 success Logs for build for x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-5 success Logs for build for x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-6 success Logs for llvm-toolchain
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-7 success Logs for set-matrix

Commit Message

James Hilliard Dec. 3, 2022, 1:08 a.m. UTC
Both tolower and toupper are built in c functions, we should not
redefine them as this can result in a build error.

Fixes the following errors:
progs/bpf_iter_ksym.c:10:20: error: conflicting types for built-in function 'tolower'; expected 'int(int)' [-Werror=builtin-declaration-mismatch]
   10 | static inline char tolower(char c)
      |                    ^~~~~~~
progs/bpf_iter_ksym.c:5:1: note: 'tolower' is declared in header '<ctype.h>'
    4 | #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
  +++ |+#include <ctype.h>
    5 |
progs/bpf_iter_ksym.c:17:20: error: conflicting types for built-in function 'toupper'; expected 'int(int)' [-Werror=builtin-declaration-mismatch]
   17 | static inline char toupper(char c)
      |                    ^~~~~~~
progs/bpf_iter_ksym.c:17:20: note: 'toupper' is declared in header '<ctype.h>'

See background on this sort of issue:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/20582607
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12213

(C99, 7.1.3p1) "All identifiers with external linkage in any of the
following subclauses (including the future library directions) are
always reserved for use as identifiers with external linkage."

This is documented behavior in GCC:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Other-Builtins.html#index-std-2

Signed-off-by: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
---
Changes v1 -> v2:
  - add more details
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_ksym.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Comments

patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org Dec. 5, 2022, 3:10 a.m. UTC | #1
Hello:

This patch was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (master)
by Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>:

On Fri,  2 Dec 2022 18:08:44 -0700 you wrote:
> Both tolower and toupper are built in c functions, we should not
> redefine them as this can result in a build error.
> 
> Fixes the following errors:
> progs/bpf_iter_ksym.c:10:20: error: conflicting types for built-in function 'tolower'; expected 'int(int)' [-Werror=builtin-declaration-mismatch]
>    10 | static inline char tolower(char c)
>       |                    ^~~~~~~
> progs/bpf_iter_ksym.c:5:1: note: 'tolower' is declared in header '<ctype.h>'
>     4 | #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
>   +++ |+#include <ctype.h>
>     5 |
> progs/bpf_iter_ksym.c:17:20: error: conflicting types for built-in function 'toupper'; expected 'int(int)' [-Werror=builtin-declaration-mismatch]
>    17 | static inline char toupper(char c)
>       |                    ^~~~~~~
> progs/bpf_iter_ksym.c:17:20: note: 'toupper' is declared in header '<ctype.h>'
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [bpf-next,v2] selftests/bpf: Fix conflicts with built-in functions in bpf_iter_ksym
    https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/ab0350c743d5

You are awesome, thank you!
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_ksym.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_ksym.c
index 285c008cbf9c..9ba14c37bbcc 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_ksym.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_ksym.c
@@ -7,14 +7,14 @@  char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
 
 unsigned long last_sym_value = 0;
 
-static inline char tolower(char c)
+static inline char to_lower(char c)
 {
 	if (c >= 'A' && c <= 'Z')
 		c += ('a' - 'A');
 	return c;
 }
 
-static inline char toupper(char c)
+static inline char to_upper(char c)
 {
 	if (c >= 'a' && c <= 'z')
 		c -= ('a' - 'A');
@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@  int dump_ksym(struct bpf_iter__ksym *ctx)
 	type = iter->type;
 
 	if (iter->module_name[0]) {
-		type = iter->exported ? toupper(type) : tolower(type);
+		type = iter->exported ? to_upper(type) : to_lower(type);
 		BPF_SEQ_PRINTF(seq, "0x%llx %c %s [ %s ] ",
 			       value, type, iter->name, iter->module_name);
 	} else {