> diff --git a/include/linux/ftrace.h b/include/linux/ftrace.h > index 28b30c6f1031..282da661f131 100644 > --- a/include/linux/ftrace.h > +++ b/include/linux/ftrace.h > @@ -551,6 +551,8 @@ int update_ftrace_direct_mod(struct ftrace_ops *ops, > struct ftrace_hash *hash, b > > void ftrace_stub_direct_tramp(void); > > +unsigned long ftrace_hash_count(struct ftrace_hash *hash); > + > #else > struct ftrace_ops; > static inline unsigned long ftrace_find_rec_direct(unsigned long ip)
Is a fallback stub needed here? The function is declared under CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_DIRECT_CALLS but other direct call functions in this header provide static inline fallbacks in the #else block. If an external caller uses this function on a kernel configured without direct calls, would this cause a build failure due to an implicit declaration? [ ... ] --- AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug. See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/26509800686
