On 2026/3/6 10:26 Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]> write: > On Thu, Mar 5, 2026 at 5:40 PM Alexei Starovoitov > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2026 at 5:16 PM Menglong Dong <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > On 2026/3/6 06:21 Varun R Mallya <[email protected]> write: > > > > Building selftests with > > > > clang 23.0.0 (6fae863eba8a72cdd82f37e7111a46a70be525e0) triggers > > > > the following error: > > > > > > > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fexit_bpf2bpf.c:117:12: > > > > error: assigning to 'char *' from 'const char *' discards qualifiers > > > > [-Werror,-Wincompatible-pointer-types-discards-qualifiers] > > > > > > > > The variable `tgt_name` is declared as `char *`, but it stores the > > > > result of strstr(prog_name[i], "/"). Since `prog_name[i]` is a > > > > `const char *`, the returned pointer should also be treated as > > > > const-qualified. > > > > > > > > Update `tgt_name` to `const char *` to match the type of the underlying > > > > string and silence the compiler warning. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Varun R Mallya <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fexit_bpf2bpf.c | 2 +- > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fexit_bpf2bpf.c > > > > b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fexit_bpf2bpf.c > > > > index 23d933f1aec6..92c20803ea76 100644 > > > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fexit_bpf2bpf.c > > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fexit_bpf2bpf.c > > > > @@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ static void test_fexit_bpf2bpf_common(const char > > > > *obj_file, > > > > struct bpf_link_info link_info; > > > > struct bpf_program *pos; > > > > const char *pos_sec_name; > > > > - char *tgt_name; > > > > + const char *tgt_name; > > > > > > I have been suffering from this build error too. So, > > > > > > Acked-by: Menglong Dong <[email protected]> > > > > Looks like this patch was lost. Pls resend. > > Ohh. I see it now. Your reply got delivered before the patch itself > and the patch went to spam. > No need to resend.
Okay!
