From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Amery Hung" <ameryhung@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 14/15] selftests/bpf: Test attaching struct_ops to a cgroup
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 20:23:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260917202335.198FC1F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260917200542.3689605-15-ameryhung@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] bpf: missing error check and info_len reset for bpf_map_get_info_by_fd()
--
commit 2cf8a5f36e0f4cc232574cbef36b043f1e914740
Author: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
selftests/bpf: Test attaching struct_ops to a cgroup
This commit exercises attaching the bpf_tcp_ops struct_ops to cgroups via the
generic cgroup link infrastructure. It adds multiple subtests to validate
execution order, query behavior, updates, and hierarchy inheritance.
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_tcp_ops.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_tcp_ops.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..6435ed1c2cf6d
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_tcp_ops.c
[ ... ]
> +static void test_query(int cgroup_fd, struct bpf_tcp_ops *skel)
> +{
> + LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_prog_query_opts, query_opts);
> + struct bpf_map_info info = {};
> + __u32 info_len = sizeof(info);
> + struct bpf_link *link1 = NULL, *link2 = NULL;
> + __u32 map1_id, map2_id, map_ids[2] = {};
> + __s32 type_id;
> +
> + type_id = get_bpf_tcp_ops_type_id();
> + if (type_id <= 0)
> + return;
> +
> + bpf_map_get_info_by_fd(bpf_map__fd(skel->maps.tcp_ops1), &info, &info_len);
> + map1_id = info.id;
> +
> + bpf_map_get_info_by_fd(bpf_map__fd(skel->maps.tcp_ops2), &info, &info_len);
[Severity: Medium]
Could the second call to bpf_map_get_info_by_fd() fail to retrieve the full
information?
The first call modifies info_len to reflect the actual size of the returned
structure. If that returned size is smaller than sizeof(info), the second
call will reuse this reduced info_len, potentially missing fields like 'id'.
Should info_len be reset to sizeof(info) before the second call?
Also, does this code need to verify the return values of these calls using
ASSERT_OK() to ensure map1_id and map2_id are populated with valid data?
> + map2_id = info.id;
[ ... ]
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260917200542.3689605-1-ameryhung@gmail.com?part=14
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-17 20:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-17 20:05 [PATCH bpf-next v4 00/15] bpf: A common way to attach struct_ops to a cgroup Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 01/15] bpf: Remove __rcu tagging in st_link->map Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 02/15] bpf: Make struct_ops tasks_rcu grace period optional Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:30 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-17 21:34 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 03/15] bpf: Add bpf_struct_ops accessor helpers Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:18 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-17 21:16 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 04/15] bpf: Remove unnecessary prog_list_prog() check Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 05/15] bpf: Replace prog_list_prog() check with direct pl->prog and pl->link check Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 06/15] bpf: Add prog_list_init_item(), prog_list_replace_item(), and prog_list_id() Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 07/15] bpf: Move LSM trampoline unlink into bpf_cgroup_link_auto_detach() Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 08/15] bpf: Add a few bpf_cgroup_array_* helper functions Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 09/15] bpf: Add infrastructure to support attaching struct_ops to cgroups Amery Hung
2026-09-17 21:34 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 10/15] bpf: Allow all struct_ops to use bpf_dynptr_from_skb() Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 11/15] bpf: tcp: Support selected sock_ops callbacks as struct_ops Amery Hung
2026-09-17 21:34 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 12/15] bpf: tcp: Support parse/len/write header option hooks in bpf_tcp_ops Amery Hung
2026-09-17 21:34 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 13/15] libbpf: Support attaching struct_ops to a cgroup Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 14/15] selftests/bpf: Test " Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:23 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-09-17 21:34 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 15/15] selftests/bpf: Add test for bpf_tcp_ops header option hooks Amery Hung
2026-09-19 5:40 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 00/15] bpf: A common way to attach struct_ops to a cgroup patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260917202335.198FC1F000FF@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.