Re: [PATCH] bpf_helpers.h: define bpf_tail_call_static when building with GCC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 1/23/24 10:59 AM, Jose E. Marchesi wrote:
The definition of bpf_tail_call_static in tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
is guarded by a preprocessor check to assure that clang is recent
enough to support it.  This patch updates the guard so the function is
compiled when using GCC as well.

Tested in bpf-next master.
No regressions.

Signed-off-by: Jose E. Marchesi <jose.marchesi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: david.faust@xxxxxxxxxx
Cc: cupertino.miranda@xxxxxxxxxx
---
  tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h | 2 +-
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
index 2324cc42b017..3306f50c5081 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@
  /*
   * Helper function to perform a tail call with a constant/immediate map slot.
   */
-#if __clang_major__ >= 8 && defined(__bpf__)
+#if (!defined(__clang__) || __clang_major__ >= 8) && defined(__bpf__)

Do you want to guard with a gcc version as well here or you assume any gcc which supports bpf
should be okay here?

  static __always_inline void
  bpf_tail_call_static(void *ctx, const void *map, const __u32 slot)
  {




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux