From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B76646AED7 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2026 14:12:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784815956; cv=none; b=ubUTCPopl+oGQPZ74bHrfn/2Ldx1JqW9rLOlf3fA0g0q1ngtOaxe4VhG2rCqUlMV/jyFhEkt2uKCuShk4N5vuaco3zCq1rRKyWnr6PopaqSGNKw1L2faNuineIj8DIZNcEXVvAblBFdKYapjLrKT6ZfF3AoJDnXReckCaMZF/pY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784815956; c=relaxed/simple; bh=UuvAtim8IgbUjy17i/E2FQmmxRQAcmmPhcnhM0WW02Y=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=s+eLt+QnMhH0SGWgZZBJITg1XI6PeRBuDBneUkmqfW9czc7gCvEP5Sv9NLseBXhVPFxTF7E0ly7S0jj0U9++GYwr4+3lfycVhuD7HhOh7v14DcVICO7NNS9f7ed+IVPJY64UP1X79gwboD3sW4OEvGSX2gqM6SYKCgj13MDaSEI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Crn7FJOz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Crn7FJOz" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CB081F000E9; Thu, 23 Jul 2026 14:12:26 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1784815946; bh=39i8AWSNGH1K+svrKKjlTIPgF3U5hPbSqo9/5J1THqI=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=Crn7FJOzMVXfaor8HpYGKr42X2FzxHRPYGrQcNTzbbFnRdy2LDbDd5rI271zKF1xp dzUWBeRhrDPPrNtkcL0rGJihMmUUzXa9bQuzYbl30vofQJXrd7FuxREfHLjz2SX1DS DpZYi1TGP9p9KoOZFFKHz9/vdrVWv1duCiF/FYDbXF6xxCx7xEfXwOmzyeE/CHaqYd Ynm650o5bVwyJ4RJS9f4+SaHz6xHXfk0k5ChQTifYdVEJg1666sjpsrROP9HGqaVRe 1W1cfqNH2KnSWTFR4KusKbLV5+OdlNkKARmQ6pUObzRs4RFF8Ixrk2UrYNPZ9z8kpw g+smIyqQg6Plg== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] s390/bpf: Enable atomics tests for s390 Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Maxim Khmelevskii" Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260723140648.583055-8-max@linux.ibm.com> References: <20260723140648.583055-5-max@linux.ibm.com> <20260723140648.583055-8-max@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 14:12:25 +0000 Message-Id: <20260723141226.4CB081F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Medium] Meaningful code and commit message mismatch: failure to reuse CA= N_USE_LOAD_ACQ_STORE_REL in arena_atomics.c. -- --- Patch [3]: [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] s390/bpf: Enable atomics tests for s390= --- commit c1e0ed2dde3c2d83049962c67b540464ea7a24d3 Author: Maxim Khmelevskii s390/bpf: Enable atomics tests for s390 This commit adds s390 to the list of supported architectures for atomics tests and updates CAN_USE_LOAD_ACQ_STORE_REL in bpf_misc.h. > Reuse CAN_USE_LOAD_ACQ_STORE_REL in arena_atomics selftest, > to remove code duplication. [Severity: Medium] Is this description accurate for the changes actually made in arena_atomics= .c? > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/arena_atomics.c b/tools/te= sting/selftests/bpf/progs/arena_atomics.c > index 2e7751a853999..73bc2b835f3fe 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/arena_atomics.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/arena_atomics.c > @@ -28,8 +28,10 @@ bool skip_all_tests =3D true; > =20 > #if defined(ENABLE_ATOMICS_TESTS) && \ > defined(__BPF_FEATURE_ADDR_SPACE_CAST) && \ > - (defined(__TARGET_ARCH_arm64) || defined(__TARGET_ARCH_x86) || \ > - (defined(__TARGET_ARCH_riscv) && __riscv_xlen =3D=3D 64)) > + (defined(__TARGET_ARCH_arm64) || \ > + defined(__TARGET_ARCH_x86) || \ > + (defined(__TARGET_ARCH_riscv) && __riscv_xlen =3D=3D 64) || \ > + defined(__TARGET_ARCH_s390)) [Severity: Medium] Could this #if block use CAN_USE_LOAD_ACQ_STORE_REL as mentioned in the commit message, instead of manually expanding the architecture list? By not using the macro, it appears that powerpc and loongarch support defined in bpf_misc.h are omitted in these checks. This manual expansion also seems to be duplicated in load_acquire() and store_release() later in the patch. [ ... ] --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260723140648.5830= 55-5-max@linux.ibm.com?part=3D3