On 10/4/26 15:40, Feng Yang wrote: > On Fri, 10 Apr 2026 15:21:26 +0800 Leon Hwang wrote: >> On 10/4/26 14:10, Feng Yang wrote: >>> From: Feng Yang <[email protected]> >>> >> >> [...] >> >>> + >>> +static int check_attach_sleepable(u32 btf_id, unsigned long addr, const >>> char *func_name) >>> +{ >>> + /* fentry/fexit/fmod_ret progs can be sleepable if they are >>> + * attached to ALLOW_ERROR_INJECTION and are not in denylist. >>> + */ >>> + if (!check_non_sleepable_error_inject(btf_id) && >>> + within_error_injection_list(addr)) >>> + return 0; >>> + >>> + return -EINVAL; >>> +} >>> + >>> +static int check_attach_modify_return(unsigned long addr, const char >>> *func_name) >>> +{ >>> + if (within_error_injection_list(addr) || >>> + !strncmp(SECURITY_PREFIX, func_name, sizeof(SECURITY_PREFIX) - 1)) >>> + return 0; >>> + >>> + return -EINVAL; >>> +} >> >> Why did you move them here? Seems that you didn't use them. > > Because CONFIG_FUNCTION_ERROR_INJECTION is directly reused here, > and the function has_arch_syscall_prefix is intended to be used. >
You can declare the function instead. No? But, the function has_arch_syscall_prefix was not used in your new code? Thanks, Leon
