diff mbox series

[v4,bpf-next,1/3] bpf: Don't explicitly emit BTF for struct btf_iter_num

Message ID 20231002195341.2940874-2-davemarchevsky@fb.com (mailing list archive)
State Superseded
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series Open-coded task_vma iter | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-0 success Logs for ShellCheck
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-5 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-3 success Logs for build for x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-4 success Logs for build for x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-2 success Logs for build for s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-6 success Logs for test_maps on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-8 success Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-9 success Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-18 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-16 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-20 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-26 success Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-21 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-22 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-28 success Logs for veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-19 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-25 success Logs for test_verifier on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-24 success Logs for test_verifier on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-27 success Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-23 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-10 success Logs for test_progs on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-14 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-13 success Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-12 success Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-17 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-16
netdev/series_format success Posting correctly formatted
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for bpf-next
netdev/fixes_present success Fixes tag not required for -next series
netdev/header_inline success No static functions without inline keyword in header files
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 1345 this patch: 1345
netdev/cc_maintainers warning 7 maintainers not CCed: martin.lau@linux.dev jolsa@kernel.org haoluo@google.com sdf@google.com john.fastabend@gmail.com kpsingh@kernel.org song@kernel.org
netdev/build_clang success Errors and warnings before: 1364 this patch: 1364
netdev/verify_signedoff success Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer
netdev/deprecated_api success None detected
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: 1368 this patch: 1368
netdev/checkpatch success total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 8 lines checked
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/source_inline success Was 0 now: 0
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-15 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-11 success Logs for test_progs on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR success PR summary
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-7 success Logs for test_maps on s390x with gcc

Commit Message

Dave Marchevsky Oct. 2, 2023, 7:53 p.m. UTC 
Commit 6018e1f407cc ("bpf: implement numbers iterator") added the
BTF_TYPE_EMIT line that this patch is modifying. The struct btf_iter_num
doesn't exist, so only a forward declaration is emitted in BTF:

  FWD 'btf_iter_num' fwd_kind=struct

That commit was probably hoping to ensure that struct bpf_iter_num is
emitted in vmlinux BTF. A previous version of this patch changed the
line to emit the correct type, but Yonghong confirmed that it would
definitely be emitted regardless in [0], so this patch simply removes
the line.

This isn't marked "Fixes" because the extraneous btf_iter_num FWD wasn't
causing any issues that I noticed, aside from mild confusion when I
looked through the code.

  [0]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/25d08207-43e6-36a8-5e0f-47a913d4cda5@linux.dev/

Signed-off-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/bpf/bpf_iter.c | 2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_iter.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_iter.c
index 96856f130cbf..833faa04461b 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_iter.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_iter.c
@@ -793,8 +793,6 @@  __bpf_kfunc int bpf_iter_num_new(struct bpf_iter_num *it, int start, int end)
 	BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(struct bpf_iter_num_kern) != sizeof(struct bpf_iter_num));
 	BUILD_BUG_ON(__alignof__(struct bpf_iter_num_kern) != __alignof__(struct bpf_iter_num));
 
-	BTF_TYPE_EMIT(struct btf_iter_num);
-
 	/* start == end is legit, it's an empty range and we'll just get NULL
 	 * on first (and any subsequent) bpf_iter_num_next() call
 	 */