With gcc14, when building with RELEASE=1, I hit four below compilation
failure:
Error 1:
In file included from test_loader.c:6:
test_loader.c: In function ‘run_subtest’: test_progs.h:194:17:
error: ‘retval’ may be used uninitialized in this function
[-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
194 | fprintf(stdout, ##format); \
| ^~~~~~~
test_loader.c:958:13: note: ‘retval’ was declared here
958 | int retval, err, i;
| ^~~~~~
The uninitialized var 'retval' actually could cause incorrect result.
Error 2:
In function ‘test_fd_array_cnt’:
prog_tests/fd_array.c:71:14: error: ‘btf_id’ may be used uninitialized in this
function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
71 | fd = bpf_btf_get_fd_by_id(id);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
prog_tests/fd_array.c:302:15: note: ‘btf_id’ was declared here
302 | __u32 btf_id;
| ^~~~~~
Changing ASSERT_GE to ASSERT_EQ can fix the compilation error. Otherwise,
there is no functionality change.
Error 3:
prog_tests/tailcalls.c: In function ‘test_tailcall_hierarchy_count’:
prog_tests/tailcalls.c:1402:23: error: ‘fentry_data_fd’ may be used uninitialized
in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
1402 | err = bpf_map_lookup_elem(fentry_data_fd, &i, &val);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The code is correct. The change intends to silence gcc errors.
Error 4: (this error only happens on arm64)
In file included from prog_tests/log_buf.c:4:
prog_tests/log_buf.c: In function ‘bpf_prog_load_log_buf’:
./test_progs.h:390:22: error: ‘log_buf’ may be used uninitialized [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
390 | int ___err = libbpf_get_error(___res); \
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
prog_tests/log_buf.c:158:14: note: in expansion of macro ‘ASSERT_OK_PTR’
158 | if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(log_buf, "log_buf_alloc"))
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
In file included from selftests/bpf/tools/include/bpf/bpf.h:32,
from ./test_progs.h:36:
selftests/bpf/tools/include/bpf/libbpf_legacy.h:113:17:
note: by argument 1 of type ‘const void *’ to ‘libbpf_get_error’ declared here
113 | LIBBPF_API long libbpf_get_error(const void *ptr);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Adding a pragma to disable maybe-uninitialized fixed the issue.
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250617044956.2686668-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Replace comma between expressions with semicolons.
Using a ',' in place of a ';' can have unintended side effects.
Although that is not the case here, it is seems best to use ';'
unless ',' is intended.
Found by inspection.
No functional change intended.
Compile tested only.
Signed-off-by: Chen Ni <nichen@iscas.ac.cn>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Anton Protopopov <aspsk@isovalent.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20250310032045.651068-1-nichen@iscas.ac.cn
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Add a new set of tests to test the new field in PROG_LOAD-related
part of bpf_attr: fd_array_cnt.
Add the following test cases:
* fd_array_cnt/no-fd-array: program is loaded in a normal
way, without any fd_array present
* fd_array_cnt/fd-array-ok: pass two extra non-used maps,
check that they're bound to the program
* fd_array_cnt/fd-array-dup-input: pass a few extra maps,
only two of which are unique
* fd_array_cnt/fd-array-ref-maps-in-array: pass a map in
fd_array which is also referenced from within the program
* fd_array_cnt/fd-array-trash-input: pass array with some trash
* fd_array_cnt/fd-array-2big: pass too large array
All the tests above are using the bpf(2) syscall directly,
no libbpf involved.
Signed-off-by: Anton Protopopov <aspsk@isovalent.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20241213130934.1087929-7-aspsk@isovalent.com
Yonghong Song
Chen Ni
Anton Protopopov