* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: clean up for 'const static' in bpf_lsm.c
2021-02-05 1:52 [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: clean up for 'const static' in bpf_lsm.c Xu Jia
@ 2021-02-05 1:46 ` Alexei Starovoitov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2021-02-05 1:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xu Jia
Cc: bpf, KP Singh, John Fastabend, Florent Revest,
Alexei Starovoitov, Network Development, LKML
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 5:40 PM Xu Jia <xujia39@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> Prefer 'static const' over 'const static' here
>
> Signed-off-by: Xu Jia <xujia39@huawei.com>
> ---
> kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> index 1622a44d1617..75b1c678d558 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ BPF_CALL_2(bpf_bprm_opts_set, struct linux_binprm *, bprm, u64, flags)
>
> BTF_ID_LIST_SINGLE(bpf_bprm_opts_set_btf_ids, struct, linux_binprm)
>
> -const static struct bpf_func_proto bpf_bprm_opts_set_proto = {
> +static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_bprm_opts_set_proto = {
I totally agree that it's more canonical this way, but I don't think
such git history noise
is worth it.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: clean up for 'const static' in bpf_lsm.c
@ 2021-02-05 1:52 Xu Jia
2021-02-05 1:46 ` Alexei Starovoitov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Xu Jia @ 2021-02-05 1:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bpf, kpsingh, john.fastabend, revest, ast; +Cc: netdev, linux-kernel, xujia39
Prefer 'static const' over 'const static' here
Signed-off-by: Xu Jia <xujia39@huawei.com>
---
kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
index 1622a44d1617..75b1c678d558 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ BPF_CALL_2(bpf_bprm_opts_set, struct linux_binprm *, bprm, u64, flags)
BTF_ID_LIST_SINGLE(bpf_bprm_opts_set_btf_ids, struct, linux_binprm)
-const static struct bpf_func_proto bpf_bprm_opts_set_proto = {
+static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_bprm_opts_set_proto = {
.func = bpf_bprm_opts_set,
.gpl_only = false,
.ret_type = RET_INTEGER,
@@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ static bool bpf_ima_inode_hash_allowed(const struct bpf_prog *prog)
BTF_ID_LIST_SINGLE(bpf_ima_inode_hash_btf_ids, struct, inode)
-const static struct bpf_func_proto bpf_ima_inode_hash_proto = {
+static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_ima_inode_hash_proto = {
.func = bpf_ima_inode_hash,
.gpl_only = false,
.ret_type = RET_INTEGER,
--
2.22.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-02-05 1:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-02-05 1:52 [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: clean up for 'const static' in bpf_lsm.c Xu Jia
2021-02-05 1:46 ` Alexei Starovoitov
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).