@@ -4564,7 +4564,7 @@ BPF_CALL_3(bpf_sys_bpf, int, cmd, void *, attr, u32, attr_size)
return __sys_bpf(cmd, KERNEL_BPFPTR(attr), attr_size);
}
-const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_bpf_proto = {
+static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_bpf_proto = {
.func = bpf_sys_bpf,
.gpl_only = false,
.ret_type = RET_INTEGER,
@@ -4589,7 +4589,7 @@ BPF_CALL_1(bpf_sys_close, u32, fd)
return close_fd(fd);
}
-const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_close_proto = {
+static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_close_proto = {
.func = bpf_sys_close,
.gpl_only = false,
.ret_type = RET_INTEGER,
The sparse tool complains as follows: kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4567:29: warning: symbol 'bpf_sys_bpf_proto' was not declared. Should it be static? kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4592:29: warning: symbol 'bpf_sys_close_proto' was not declared. Should it be static? This symbol is not used outside of syscall.c, so marks it static. Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com> --- kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)