Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Make some symbols static

[Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>]

> On May 18, 2021, at 11:41 PM, Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> The sparse tool complains as follows:
> 
> kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4567:29: warning:
> symbol 'bpf_sys_bpf_proto' was not declared. Should it be static?
> kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4592:29: warning:
> symbol 'bpf_sys_close_proto' was not declared. Should it be static?
> 
> This symbol is not used outside of syscall.c, so marks it static.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>

Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>

> ---
> kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> index 2361d97e2c67..73d15bc62d8c 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> @@ -4564,7 +4564,7 @@ BPF_CALL_3(bpf_sys_bpf, int, cmd, void *, attr, u32, attr_size)
> 	return __sys_bpf(cmd, KERNEL_BPFPTR(attr), attr_size);
> }
> 
> -const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_bpf_proto = {
> +static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_bpf_proto = {
> 	.func		= bpf_sys_bpf,
> 	.gpl_only	= false,
> 	.ret_type	= RET_INTEGER,
> @@ -4589,7 +4589,7 @@ BPF_CALL_1(bpf_sys_close, u32, fd)
> 	return close_fd(fd);
> }
> 
> -const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_close_proto = {
> +static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sys_close_proto = {
> 	.func		= bpf_sys_close,
> 	.gpl_only	= false,
> 	.ret_type	= RET_INTEGER,
> -- 
> 2.17.1
>