All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
To: Nick Hudson <nhudson@akamai.com>, sashiko@lists.linux.dev
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 6/6] selftests/bpf: tc_tunnel validate decap GSO state
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2026 12:46:53 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2026416193859.IJ9_.martin.lau@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260416124324.B0CE6C2BCAF@smtp.kernel.org>

On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 12:43:24PM +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s):

> - [Low] Invalid pointer arithmetic (`kskb->head + kskb->end`) causes a compilation failure on 32-bit architectures.

> > @@ -655,6 +684,35 @@ static int decap_internal(struct __sk_buff *skb, int off, int len, char proto)
> >  	if (bpf_skb_adjust_room(skb, -olen, BPF_ADJ_ROOM_MAC, flags))
> >  		return TC_ACT_SHOT;
> >  
> > +	kskb = bpf_cast_to_kern_ctx(skb);
> > +	shinfo = bpf_core_cast(kskb->head + kskb->end, struct skb_shared_info);
> 
> Will this cause a compilation failure on 32-bit architectures?
> 
> On 32-bit architectures without NET_SKBUFF_DATA_USES_OFFSET, sk_buff::end
> is defined as a pointer (unsigned char *) rather than an offset. Adding two
> pointers is an invalid operation in C and will result in a build error.

Other tests have been using it to get shinfo already. I would leave it as is.
If it really would be needed to run and compile on 32-bit in the future,
it could use bpf_core_field_size(kskb->end) and then do things differently.

      reply	other threads:[~2026-04-16 19:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-16  7:55 [PATCH bpf-next v4 0/6] bpf: decap flags and GSO state updates Nick Hudson
2026-04-16  7:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/6] bpf: name the enum for BPF_FUNC_skb_adjust_room flags Nick Hudson
2026-04-16 10:02   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-16 14:18     ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-04-17 11:44       ` Hudson, Nick
2026-04-16  7:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/6] bpf: refactor masks for ADJ_ROOM flags and encap validation Nick Hudson
2026-04-16  7:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 3/6] bpf: add BPF_F_ADJ_ROOM_DECAP_* flags for tunnel decapsulation Nick Hudson
2026-04-16  7:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 4/6] bpf: allow new DECAP flags and add guard rails Nick Hudson
2026-04-16  7:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 5/6] bpf: clear decap tunnel GSO state in skb_adjust_room Nick Hudson
2026-04-16  8:34   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-16 12:03   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-16 12:32   ` Willem de Bruijn
2026-04-17 12:27     ` Hudson, Nick
2026-04-16  7:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 6/6] selftests/bpf: tc_tunnel validate decap GSO state Nick Hudson
2026-04-16 12:33   ` Willem de Bruijn
2026-04-16 12:43   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-16 19:46     ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]

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=2026416193859.IJ9_.martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --to=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nhudson@akamai.com \
    --cc=sashiko@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.