Re: linux-next: runtime warnings after merge of the bpf-next tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 20:02:28 -0800 Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 7:55 PM Daniel Xu <dxu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/btf_ids.h b/include/linux/btf_ids.h
> > index 0fe4f1cd1918..e24aabfe8ecc 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/btf_ids.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/btf_ids.h
> > @@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ BTF_SET8_END(name)
> >  #define BTF_SET_END(name)
> >  #define BTF_SET8_START(name) static struct btf_id_set8 __maybe_unused name = { 0 };
> >  #define BTF_SET8_END(name)
> > -#define BTF_KFUNCS_START(name) static struct btf_id_set8 __maybe_unused name = { 0 };
> > +#define BTF_KFUNCS_START(name) static struct btf_id_set8 __maybe_unused name = { .flags = BTF_SET8_KFUNCS };
> >  #define BTF_KFUNCS_END(name)  
> 
> Most likely you're correct.
> Force pushed bpf-next with this fix.

That fixed it for me, thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Attachment: pgpxbqKfNg3my.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature