| Message ID | ZnB9X1Jj6c04ufC0@sirena.org.uk |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | linux-next: build failure after merge of the bpf-next tree | expand |
Hi Mark, kernel test robot noticed the following build errors: [auto build test ERROR on hid/for-next] [cannot apply to linus/master v6.10-rc4 next-20240621] [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Mark-Brown/linux-next-build-failure-after-merge-of-the-bpf-next-tree/20240618-022240 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/hid/hid.git for-next patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/ZnB9X1Jj6c04ufC0%40sirena.org.uk patch subject: linux-next: build failure after merge of the bpf-next tree config: x86_64-randconfig-r122-20240622 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240622/202406221655.xSqDIUk6-lkp@intel.com/config) compiler: clang version 18.1.5 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 617a15a9eac96088ae5e9134248d8236e34b91b1) reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240622/202406221655.xSqDIUk6-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202406221655.xSqDIUk6-lkp@intel.com/ All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): >> drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c:280:9: error: incompatible function pointer types initializing 'int (*)(void *)' with an expression of type 'int (void *, struct bpf_link *)' [-Wincompatible-function-pointer-types] 280 | .reg = hid_bpf_reg, | ^~~~~~~~~~~ >> drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c:281:11: error: incompatible function pointer types initializing 'void (*)(void *)' with an expression of type 'void (void *, struct bpf_link *)' [-Wincompatible-function-pointer-types] 281 | .unreg = hid_bpf_unreg, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2 errors generated. vim +280 drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 274 ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 275 static struct bpf_struct_ops bpf_hid_bpf_ops = { ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 276 .verifier_ops = &hid_bpf_verifier_ops, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 277 .init = hid_bpf_ops_init, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 278 .check_member = hid_bpf_ops_check_member, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 279 .init_member = hid_bpf_ops_init_member, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 @280 .reg = hid_bpf_reg, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 @281 .unreg = hid_bpf_unreg, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 282 .name = "hid_bpf_ops", ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 283 .cfi_stubs = &__bpf_hid_bpf_ops, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 284 .owner = THIS_MODULE, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 285 }; ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 286
Hi Mark, kernel test robot noticed the following build errors: [auto build test ERROR on hid/for-next] [cannot apply to linus/master v6.10-rc4 next-20240621] [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Mark-Brown/linux-next-build-failure-after-merge-of-the-bpf-next-tree/20240618-022240 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/hid/hid.git for-next patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/ZnB9X1Jj6c04ufC0%40sirena.org.uk patch subject: linux-next: build failure after merge of the bpf-next tree config: i386-allmodconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240622/202406221626.JK0Nnkxy-lkp@intel.com/config) compiler: gcc-13 (Ubuntu 13.2.0-4ubuntu3) 13.2.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240622/202406221626.JK0Nnkxy-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202406221626.JK0Nnkxy-lkp@intel.com/ All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): >> drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c:280:16: error: initialization of 'int (*)(void *)' from incompatible pointer type 'int (*)(void *, struct bpf_link *)' [-Werror=incompatible-pointer-types] 280 | .reg = hid_bpf_reg, | ^~~~~~~~~~~ drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c:280:16: note: (near initialization for 'bpf_hid_bpf_ops.reg') >> drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c:281:18: error: initialization of 'void (*)(void *)' from incompatible pointer type 'void (*)(void *, struct bpf_link *)' [-Werror=incompatible-pointer-types] 281 | .unreg = hid_bpf_unreg, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c:281:18: note: (near initialization for 'bpf_hid_bpf_ops.unreg') cc1: some warnings being treated as errors vim +280 drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 274 ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 275 static struct bpf_struct_ops bpf_hid_bpf_ops = { ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 276 .verifier_ops = &hid_bpf_verifier_ops, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 277 .init = hid_bpf_ops_init, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 278 .check_member = hid_bpf_ops_check_member, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 279 .init_member = hid_bpf_ops_init_member, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 @280 .reg = hid_bpf_reg, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 @281 .unreg = hid_bpf_unreg, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 282 .name = "hid_bpf_ops", ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 283 .cfi_stubs = &__bpf_hid_bpf_ops, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 284 .owner = THIS_MODULE, ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 285 }; ebc0d8093e8c97 Benjamin Tissoires 2024-06-08 286
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 05:54:47PM +0200, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > On Jun 24 2024, Thinker Li wrote: > > However, I suggest you implement ".update" if you think it is > > reasonable for HID, > > although it is not a MUST-BE. ".update" provides a good feature that > > user space programs > > can update an implementation on the flight. > FWIW, Mark handles linux-next, so not sure he has deep knowledge of > HID-BPF, and not sure he wants too :) Only holiday cover but yes.
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 8:54 AM Benjamin Tissoires <bentiss@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Jun 24 2024, Thinker Li wrote: > > Hi Mark, > > > > I'm sorry for not getting back to you sooner. I have been traveling > > since my last message. > > I guess this patch is for the HID tree. The changes in this patch are great. > > Ok, thanks for the review. However, the need appears because there is a > conflicting update in the bpf tree. > > May I ask the bpf maintainers (Daniel/Alexei/Andrii) for an immutable > tag I could merge to so I can take this patch from Mark? I'm not sure how that would look like. imo conflict is minor enough. When net-next/bpf-next lands in the upcoming merge window just provide Mark's patch as a conflict resolution suggestion in the cover letter of hid PR ?
diff --git a/drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c b/drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c index 5f200557ff12b..744318e7d936b 100644 --- a/drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c +++ b/drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c @@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ static int hid_bpf_ops_init_member(const struct btf_type *t, return 0; } -static int hid_bpf_reg(void *kdata) +static int hid_bpf_reg(void *kdata, struct bpf_link *link) { struct hid_bpf_ops *ops = kdata; struct hid_device *hdev; @@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ static int hid_bpf_reg(void *kdata) return err; } -static void hid_bpf_unreg(void *kdata) +static void hid_bpf_unreg(void *kdata, struct bpf_link *link) { struct hid_bpf_ops *ops = kdata; struct hid_device *hdev;
Hi all, After merging the bpf-next tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) failed like this: /tmp/next/build/drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c:280:16: error: initialization of 'int (*)(void *, struct bpf_link *)' from incompatible pointer type 'int (*)(void *)' [-Werror=incompatible-pointer-types] 280 | .reg = hid_bpf_reg, | ^~~~~~~~~~~ /tmp/next/build/drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c:280:16: note: (near initialization for 'bpf_hid_bpf_ops.reg') /tmp/next/build/drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c:281:18: error: initialization of 'void (*)(void *, struct bpf_link *)' from incompatible pointer type 'void (*)(void *)' [-Werror=incompatible-pointer-types] 281 | .unreg = hid_bpf_unreg, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ /tmp/next/build/drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c:281:18: note: (near initialization for 'bpf_hid_bpf_ops.unreg') Caused by commit 73287fe228721b ("bpf: pass bpf_struct_ops_link to callbacks in bpf_struct_ops.") interacting with commit ebc0d8093e8c97 ("HID: bpf: implement HID-BPF through bpf_struct_ops") from the HID tree. I've fixed it up as below: From e8aeaba00440845f9bd8d6183ca5d7383a678cd3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 19:02:27 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] HID: bpf: Fix up build Fix up build error due to 73287fe228721b ("bpf: pass bpf_struct_ops_link to callbacks in bpf_struct_ops.") Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> --- drivers/hid/bpf/hid_bpf_struct_ops.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)