Message ID | 20230801150304.1980987-1-arnd@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Not Applicable |
Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
Headers | show |
Series | netfilter: bpf_link: avoid unused-function warning | expand |
Context | Check | Description |
---|---|---|
netdev/tree_selection | success | Guessing tree name failed - patch did not apply |
Hi Arnd, On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 05:02:41PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > > The newly added function is unused in some random configurations: > > net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.c:32:1: error: 'get_proto_defrag_hook' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function] > 32 | get_proto_defrag_hook(struct bpf_nf_link *link, > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > This was fixed in 81584c23f249 ("netfilter: bpf: Only define get_proto_defrag_hook() if necessary"). Thanks, Daniel
On Tue, Aug 1, 2023, at 17:20, Daniel Xu wrote: > Hi Arnd, > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 05:02:41PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> >> >> The newly added function is unused in some random configurations: >> >> net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.c:32:1: error: 'get_proto_defrag_hook' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function] >> 32 | get_proto_defrag_hook(struct bpf_nf_link *link, >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> > > This was fixed in 81584c23f249 ("netfilter: bpf: Only define > get_proto_defrag_hook() if necessary"). Ok, I guess this will be in tomorrow's linux-next then, right? Arnd
On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 07:27:33PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tue, Aug 1, 2023, at 17:20, Daniel Xu wrote: > > Hi Arnd, > > > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 05:02:41PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > >> > >> The newly added function is unused in some random configurations: > >> > >> net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.c:32:1: error: 'get_proto_defrag_hook' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function] > >> 32 | get_proto_defrag_hook(struct bpf_nf_link *link, > >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> > > > > This was fixed in 81584c23f249 ("netfilter: bpf: Only define > > get_proto_defrag_hook() if necessary"). > > Ok, I guess this will be in tomorrow's linux-next then, right? > > Arnd I'm not too familiar with the linux-next process, but chatgpt is telling me it should be. Thanks, Daniel
diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.c b/net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.c index 8fe594bbc7e24..6028fd4c1ab4c 100644 --- a/net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.c +++ b/net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.c @@ -74,24 +74,26 @@ static int bpf_nf_enable_defrag(struct bpf_nf_link *link) const struct nf_defrag_hook __maybe_unused *hook; switch (link->hook_ops.pf) { -#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NF_DEFRAG_IPV4) case NFPROTO_IPV4: + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NF_DEFRAG_IPV4)) + return -EAFNOSUPPORT; + hook = get_proto_defrag_hook(link, nf_defrag_v4_hook, "nf_defrag_ipv4"); if (IS_ERR(hook)) return PTR_ERR(hook); link->defrag_hook = hook; return 0; -#endif -#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NF_DEFRAG_IPV6) case NFPROTO_IPV6: + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NF_DEFRAG_IPV6)) + return -EAFNOSUPPORT; + hook = get_proto_defrag_hook(link, nf_defrag_v6_hook, "nf_defrag_ipv6"); if (IS_ERR(hook)) return PTR_ERR(hook); link->defrag_hook = hook; return 0; -#endif default: return -EAFNOSUPPORT; }