Hi Jiri, kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
[auto build test ERROR on bpf-next/master] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Jiri-Olsa/ftrace-bpf-Remove-FTRACE_OPS_FL_JMP-ftrace_ops-flag/20251216-052916 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20251215211402.353056-10-jolsa%40kernel.org patch subject: [PATCHv5 bpf-next 9/9] bpf,x86: Use single ftrace_ops for direct calls config: riscv-allmodconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20251221/[email protected]/config) compiler: clang version 22.0.0git (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project b324c9f4fa112d61a553bf489b5f4f7ceea05ea8) reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20251221/[email protected]/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 <[email protected]> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/[email protected]/ All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): >> kernel/bpf/trampoline.c:367:9: error: call to undeclared function >> 'direct_ops_del'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function >> declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] 367 | ret = direct_ops_del(tr, old_addr); | ^ kernel/bpf/trampoline.c:367:9: note: did you mean 'direct_ops_free'? kernel/bpf/trampoline.c:298:13: note: 'direct_ops_free' declared here 298 | static void direct_ops_free(struct bpf_trampoline *tr) { } | ^ >> kernel/bpf/trampoline.c:381:9: error: call to undeclared function >> 'direct_ops_mod'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function >> declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] 381 | ret = direct_ops_mod(tr, new_addr, lock_direct_mutex); | ^ kernel/bpf/trampoline.c:381:9: note: did you mean 'direct_ops_free'? kernel/bpf/trampoline.c:298:13: note: 'direct_ops_free' declared here 298 | static void direct_ops_free(struct bpf_trampoline *tr) { } | ^ >> kernel/bpf/trampoline.c:404:9: error: call to undeclared function >> 'direct_ops_add'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function >> declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] 404 | ret = direct_ops_add(tr, new_addr); | ^ kernel/bpf/trampoline.c:404:9: note: did you mean 'direct_ops_free'? kernel/bpf/trampoline.c:298:13: note: 'direct_ops_free' declared here 298 | static void direct_ops_free(struct bpf_trampoline *tr) { } | ^ 3 errors generated. vim +/direct_ops_del +367 kernel/bpf/trampoline.c 360 361 static int unregister_fentry(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, u32 orig_flags, 362 void *old_addr) 363 { 364 int ret; 365 366 if (tr->func.ftrace_managed) > 367 ret = direct_ops_del(tr, old_addr); 368 else 369 ret = bpf_trampoline_update_fentry(tr, orig_flags, old_addr, NULL); 370 371 return ret; 372 } 373 374 static int modify_fentry(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, u32 orig_flags, 375 void *old_addr, void *new_addr, 376 bool lock_direct_mutex) 377 { 378 int ret; 379 380 if (tr->func.ftrace_managed) { > 381 ret = direct_ops_mod(tr, new_addr, lock_direct_mutex); 382 } else { 383 ret = bpf_trampoline_update_fentry(tr, orig_flags, old_addr, 384 new_addr); 385 } 386 return ret; 387 } 388 389 /* first time registering */ 390 static int register_fentry(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, void *new_addr) 391 { 392 void *ip = tr->func.addr; 393 unsigned long faddr; 394 int ret; 395 396 faddr = ftrace_location((unsigned long)ip); 397 if (faddr) { 398 if (!tr->fops) 399 return -ENOTSUPP; 400 tr->func.ftrace_managed = true; 401 } 402 403 if (tr->func.ftrace_managed) { > 404 ret = direct_ops_add(tr, new_addr); 405 } else { 406 ret = bpf_trampoline_update_fentry(tr, 0, NULL, new_addr); 407 } 408 409 return ret; 410 } 411 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
