Hi Hengqi, kernel test robot noticed the following build errors: [auto build test ERROR on kees/for-next/seccomp] [also build test ERROR on bpf-next/master bpf/master kees/for-next/pstore kees/for-next/kspp linus/master v6.6-rc5 next-20231010] [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Hengqi-Chen/seccomp-Refactor-filter-copy-create-for-reuse/20231010-100354 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kees/linux.git for-next/seccomp patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231009124046.74710-3-hengqi.chen%40gmail.com patch subject: [PATCH 2/4] seccomp, bpf: Introduce SECCOMP_LOAD_FILTER operation config: um-allyesconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231011/202310111556.DzEDzt3Z-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/config) compiler: clang version 14.0.6 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project.git f28c006a5895fc0e329fe15fead81e37457cb1d1) reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231011/202310111556.DzEDzt3Z-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/reproduce) If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202310111556.DzEDzt3Z-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/ All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): In file included from kernel/seccomp.c:29: In file included from include/linux/syscalls.h:90: In file included from include/trace/syscall.h:7: In file included from include/linux/trace_events.h:9: In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11: In file included from arch/um/include/asm/hardirq.h:5: In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17: In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20: In file included from include/linux/io.h:13: In file included from arch/um/include/asm/io.h:24: include/asm-generic/io.h:547:31: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] val = __raw_readb(PCI_IOBASE + addr); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:560:61: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] val = __le16_to_cpu((__le16 __force)__raw_readw(PCI_IOBASE + addr)); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/uapi/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:37:51: note: expanded from macro '__le16_to_cpu' #define __le16_to_cpu(x) ((__force __u16)(__le16)(x)) ^ In file included from kernel/seccomp.c:29: In file included from include/linux/syscalls.h:90: In file included from include/trace/syscall.h:7: In file included from include/linux/trace_events.h:9: In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11: In file included from arch/um/include/asm/hardirq.h:5: In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17: In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20: In file included from include/linux/io.h:13: In file included from arch/um/include/asm/io.h:24: include/asm-generic/io.h:573:61: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] val = __le32_to_cpu((__le32 __force)__raw_readl(PCI_IOBASE + addr)); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/uapi/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:35:51: note: expanded from macro '__le32_to_cpu' #define __le32_to_cpu(x) ((__force __u32)(__le32)(x)) ^ In file included from kernel/seccomp.c:29: In file included from include/linux/syscalls.h:90: In file included from include/trace/syscall.h:7: In file included from include/linux/trace_events.h:9: In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11: In file included from arch/um/include/asm/hardirq.h:5: In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17: In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20: In file included from include/linux/io.h:13: In file included from arch/um/include/asm/io.h:24: include/asm-generic/io.h:584:33: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] __raw_writeb(value, PCI_IOBASE + addr); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:594:59: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] __raw_writew((u16 __force)cpu_to_le16(value), PCI_IOBASE + addr); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:604:59: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] __raw_writel((u32 __force)cpu_to_le32(value), PCI_IOBASE + addr); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:692:20: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] readsb(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:700:20: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] readsw(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:708:20: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] readsl(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:717:21: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] writesb(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:726:21: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] writesw(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:735:21: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] writesl(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ >> kernel/seccomp.c:2046:8: error: implicit declaration of function 'security_bpf_prog_alloc' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration] ret = security_bpf_prog_alloc(prog->aux); ^ kernel/seccomp.c:2046:8: note: did you mean 'security_msg_msg_alloc'? include/linux/security.h:1245:19: note: 'security_msg_msg_alloc' declared here static inline int security_msg_msg_alloc(struct msg_msg *msg) ^ >> kernel/seccomp.c:2056:8: error: implicit declaration of function 'bpf_prog_new_fd' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration] ret = bpf_prog_new_fd(prog); ^ 12 warnings and 2 errors generated. vim +/security_bpf_prog_alloc +2046 kernel/seccomp.c 2031 2032 static long seccomp_load_filter(const char __user *filter) 2033 { 2034 struct sock_fprog fprog; 2035 struct bpf_prog *prog; 2036 int ret; 2037 2038 ret = seccomp_copy_user_filter(filter, &fprog); 2039 if (ret) 2040 return ret; 2041 2042 ret = seccomp_prepare_prog(&prog, &fprog); 2043 if (ret) 2044 return ret; 2045 > 2046 ret = security_bpf_prog_alloc(prog->aux); 2047 if (ret) { 2048 bpf_prog_free(prog); 2049 return ret; 2050 } 2051 2052 prog->aux->user = get_current_user(); 2053 atomic64_set(&prog->aux->refcnt, 1); 2054 prog->type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SECCOMP; 2055 > 2056 ret = bpf_prog_new_fd(prog); 2057 if (ret < 0) 2058 bpf_prog_put(prog); 2059 return ret; 2060 } 2061 #else 2062 static inline long seccomp_set_mode_filter(unsigned int flags, 2063 const char __user *filter) 2064 { 2065 return -EINVAL; 2066 } 2067 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
