Skip to content

Commit f10ca5d

Browse files
davemarchevskyanakryiko
authored andcommitted
bpf: Don't explicitly emit BTF for struct btf_iter_num
Commit 6018e1f ("bpf: implement numbers iterator") added the BTF_TYPE_EMIT line that this patch is modifying. The struct btf_iter_num doesn't exist, so only a forward declaration is emitted in BTF: FWD 'btf_iter_num' fwd_kind=struct That commit was probably hoping to ensure that struct bpf_iter_num is emitted in vmlinux BTF. A previous version of this patch changed the line to emit the correct type, but Yonghong confirmed that it would definitely be emitted regardless in [0], so this patch simply removes the line. This isn't marked "Fixes" because the extraneous btf_iter_num FWD wasn't causing any issues that I noticed, aside from mild confusion when I looked through the code. [0]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/25d08207-43e6-36a8-5e0f-47a913d4cda5@linux.dev/ Signed-off-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev> Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231013204426.1074286-2-davemarchevsky@fb.com
1 parent ba8ea72 commit f10ca5d

File tree

1 file changed

+0
-2
lines changed

1 file changed

+0
-2
lines changed

kernel/bpf/bpf_iter.c

Lines changed: 0 additions & 2 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -793,8 +793,6 @@ __bpf_kfunc int bpf_iter_num_new(struct bpf_iter_num *it, int start, int end)
793793
BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(struct bpf_iter_num_kern) != sizeof(struct bpf_iter_num));
794794
BUILD_BUG_ON(__alignof__(struct bpf_iter_num_kern) != __alignof__(struct bpf_iter_num));
795795

796-
BTF_TYPE_EMIT(struct btf_iter_num);
797-
798796
/* start == end is legit, it's an empty range and we'll just get NULL
799797
* on first (and any subsequent) bpf_iter_num_next() call
800798
*/

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)