All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ben Dooks (Codethink)" <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
To: linux-kernel@lists.codethink.co.uk
Cc: "Ben Dooks (Codethink)" <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
	Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>,
	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] net: bpf: add static in net/core/filter.c
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 12:04:46 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191016110446.24622-1-ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk> (raw)

There are a number of structs in net/core/filter.c
that are not exported or declared outside of the
file. Fix the following warnings by making these
all static:

net/core/filter.c:8465:31: warning: symbol 'sk_filter_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8472:27: warning: symbol 'sk_filter_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8476:31: warning: symbol 'tc_cls_act_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8484:27: warning: symbol 'tc_cls_act_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8488:31: warning: symbol 'xdp_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8495:27: warning: symbol 'xdp_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8499:31: warning: symbol 'cg_skb_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8505:27: warning: symbol 'cg_skb_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8509:31: warning: symbol 'lwt_in_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8515:27: warning: symbol 'lwt_in_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8519:31: warning: symbol 'lwt_out_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8525:27: warning: symbol 'lwt_out_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8529:31: warning: symbol 'lwt_xmit_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8536:27: warning: symbol 'lwt_xmit_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8540:31: warning: symbol 'lwt_seg6local_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8546:27: warning: symbol 'lwt_seg6local_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8550:31: warning: symbol 'cg_sock_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8556:27: warning: symbol 'cg_sock_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8559:31: warning: symbol 'cg_sock_addr_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8565:27: warning: symbol 'cg_sock_addr_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8568:31: warning: symbol 'sock_ops_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8574:27: warning: symbol 'sock_ops_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8577:31: warning: symbol 'sk_skb_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8584:27: warning: symbol 'sk_skb_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8587:31: warning: symbol 'sk_msg_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8594:27: warning: symbol 'sk_msg_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8597:31: warning: symbol 'flow_dissector_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8603:27: warning: symbol 'flow_dissector_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8929:31: warning: symbol 'sk_reuseport_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:8935:27: warning: symbol 'sk_reuseport_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?

Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
---
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Cc: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Cc: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Cc: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>
Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
---
 net/core/filter.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
index ed6563622ce3..f7338fee41f8 100644
--- a/net/core/filter.c
+++ b/net/core/filter.c
@@ -8462,18 +8462,18 @@ static u32 sk_msg_convert_ctx_access(enum bpf_access_type type,
 	return insn - insn_buf;
 }
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops sk_filter_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops sk_filter_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= sk_filter_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= sk_filter_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= bpf_convert_ctx_access,
 	.gen_ld_abs		= bpf_gen_ld_abs,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops sk_filter_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops sk_filter_prog_ops = {
 	.test_run		= bpf_prog_test_run_skb,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops tc_cls_act_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops tc_cls_act_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= tc_cls_act_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= tc_cls_act_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= tc_cls_act_convert_ctx_access,
@@ -8481,126 +8481,126 @@ const struct bpf_verifier_ops tc_cls_act_verifier_ops = {
 	.gen_ld_abs		= bpf_gen_ld_abs,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops tc_cls_act_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops tc_cls_act_prog_ops = {
 	.test_run		= bpf_prog_test_run_skb,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops xdp_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops xdp_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= xdp_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= xdp_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= xdp_convert_ctx_access,
 	.gen_prologue		= bpf_noop_prologue,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops xdp_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops xdp_prog_ops = {
 	.test_run		= bpf_prog_test_run_xdp,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops cg_skb_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops cg_skb_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= cg_skb_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= cg_skb_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= bpf_convert_ctx_access,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops cg_skb_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops cg_skb_prog_ops = {
 	.test_run		= bpf_prog_test_run_skb,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops lwt_in_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops lwt_in_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= lwt_in_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= lwt_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= bpf_convert_ctx_access,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops lwt_in_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops lwt_in_prog_ops = {
 	.test_run		= bpf_prog_test_run_skb,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops lwt_out_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops lwt_out_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= lwt_out_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= lwt_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= bpf_convert_ctx_access,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops lwt_out_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops lwt_out_prog_ops = {
 	.test_run		= bpf_prog_test_run_skb,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops lwt_xmit_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops lwt_xmit_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= lwt_xmit_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= lwt_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= bpf_convert_ctx_access,
 	.gen_prologue		= tc_cls_act_prologue,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops lwt_xmit_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops lwt_xmit_prog_ops = {
 	.test_run		= bpf_prog_test_run_skb,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops lwt_seg6local_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops lwt_seg6local_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= lwt_seg6local_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= lwt_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= bpf_convert_ctx_access,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops lwt_seg6local_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops lwt_seg6local_prog_ops = {
 	.test_run		= bpf_prog_test_run_skb,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops cg_sock_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops cg_sock_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= sock_filter_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= sock_filter_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= bpf_sock_convert_ctx_access,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops cg_sock_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops cg_sock_prog_ops = {
 };
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops cg_sock_addr_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops cg_sock_addr_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= sock_addr_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= sock_addr_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= sock_addr_convert_ctx_access,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops cg_sock_addr_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops cg_sock_addr_prog_ops = {
 };
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops sock_ops_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops sock_ops_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= sock_ops_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= sock_ops_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= sock_ops_convert_ctx_access,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops sock_ops_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops sock_ops_prog_ops = {
 };
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops sk_skb_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops sk_skb_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= sk_skb_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= sk_skb_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= sk_skb_convert_ctx_access,
 	.gen_prologue		= sk_skb_prologue,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops sk_skb_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops sk_skb_prog_ops = {
 };
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops sk_msg_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops sk_msg_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= sk_msg_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= sk_msg_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= sk_msg_convert_ctx_access,
 	.gen_prologue		= bpf_noop_prologue,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops sk_msg_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops sk_msg_prog_ops = {
 };
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops flow_dissector_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops flow_dissector_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= flow_dissector_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= flow_dissector_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= flow_dissector_convert_ctx_access,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops flow_dissector_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops flow_dissector_prog_ops = {
 	.test_run		= bpf_prog_test_run_flow_dissector,
 };
 
@@ -8926,12 +8926,12 @@ static u32 sk_reuseport_convert_ctx_access(enum bpf_access_type type,
 	return insn - insn_buf;
 }
 
-const struct bpf_verifier_ops sk_reuseport_verifier_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops sk_reuseport_verifier_ops = {
 	.get_func_proto		= sk_reuseport_func_proto,
 	.is_valid_access	= sk_reuseport_is_valid_access,
 	.convert_ctx_access	= sk_reuseport_convert_ctx_access,
 };
 
-const struct bpf_prog_ops sk_reuseport_prog_ops = {
+static const struct bpf_prog_ops sk_reuseport_prog_ops = {
 };
 #endif /* CONFIG_INET */
-- 
2.23.0


             reply	other threads:[~2019-10-16 11:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-16 11:04 Ben Dooks (Codethink) [this message]
2019-10-16 12:26 ` [PATCH] net: bpf: add static in net/core/filter.c Daniel Borkmann
2019-10-16 13:02   ` Ben Dooks
2019-10-16 13:10     ` Daniel Borkmann
2019-10-16 13:11       ` Ben Dooks
2019-10-16 13:24         ` [Linux-kernel] " Ben Dooks
2019-10-16 17:44         ` David Miller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191016110446.24622-1-ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk \
    --to=ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=hawk@kernel.org \
    --cc=jakub.kicinski@netronome.com \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=kafai@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@lists.codethink.co.uk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
    --cc=yhs@fb.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.