On 2/12/24 3:45 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 06:37:49PM -0800, thinker.li@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
SNIP
enum bpf_struct_ops_state {
@@ -1790,6 +1806,7 @@ int bpf_struct_ops_desc_init(struct bpf_struct_ops_desc *st_ops_desc,
struct btf *btf,
struct bpf_verifier_log *log);
void bpf_map_struct_ops_info_fill(struct bpf_map_info *info, struct bpf_map *map);
+void bpf_struct_ops_desc_release(struct bpf_struct_ops_desc *st_ops_desc);
#else
#define register_bpf_struct_ops(st_ops, type) ({ (void *)(st_ops); 0; })
static inline bool bpf_try_module_get(const void *data, struct module *owner)
@@ -1814,6 +1831,10 @@ static inline void bpf_map_struct_ops_info_fill(struct bpf_map_info *info, struc
{
}
+static inline void bpf_struct_ops_desc_release(struct bpf_struct_ops_desc *st_ops_desc, int len)
+{
+}
extra len argument?
Good catch. Fixed and applied. Also changed some inconsistent integer usage by
s/s32/u32/ (e.g. s/s32/u32/ arg_btf_id)