From: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH bpf-next v3 04/10] bpf: Add common attr support for prog_load
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2025 10:25:27 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53799ac8-7cb0-40df-96ca-7d1da039981c@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAADnVQ+WcMp5bgw_hHON+unufO=Mm5f7Em2kUeqmkyBZwMU0nQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 3/10/25 07:51, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2025 at 8:49 AM Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev> wrote:
>>
[...]
>> +
>> + if (!attr->log_buf && common_attrs->log_buf) {
>> + *log_common_attrs = true;
>
> I feel like a broken record.
> Do not use 'bool' arguments. There is always a better option.
> 'bool *' is even worse.
Got it — I now understand that using 'bool' here (especially as a
pointer) is a code smell and generally discouraged.
I'll remove log_common_attrs and reimplement this part to avoid the
'bool' argument altogether. I'll look for a cleaner alternative in the
next revision.
Thanks,
Leon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-03 2:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-02 15:48 [RFC PATCH bpf-next v3 00/10] bpf: Extend bpf syscall with common attributes support Leon Hwang
2025-10-02 15:48 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v3 01/10] " Leon Hwang
2025-10-02 15:48 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v3 02/10] libbpf: Add support for extended bpf syscall Leon Hwang
2025-10-06 23:08 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2025-10-09 5:15 ` Leon Hwang
2025-10-02 15:48 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v3 03/10] bpf: Refactor reporting log_true_size for prog_load Leon Hwang
2025-10-02 18:34 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-03 2:06 ` Leon Hwang
2025-10-02 15:48 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v3 04/10] bpf: Add common attr support " Leon Hwang
2025-10-02 23:51 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-03 2:25 ` Leon Hwang [this message]
2025-10-02 15:48 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v3 05/10] bpf: Refactor reporting btf_log_true_size for btf_load Leon Hwang
2025-10-02 15:48 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v3 06/10] bpf: Add common attr support " Leon Hwang
2025-10-02 15:48 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v3 07/10] bpf: Add warnings for internal bugs in map_create Leon Hwang
2025-10-03 0:06 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-03 2:31 ` Leon Hwang
2025-10-02 15:48 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v3 08/10] bpf: Add common attr support for map_create Leon Hwang
2025-10-02 15:48 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v3 09/10] libbpf: " Leon Hwang
2025-10-06 23:08 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2025-10-09 5:35 ` Leon Hwang
2025-10-02 15:48 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v3 10/10] selftests/bpf: Add cases to test map create failure log Leon Hwang
2025-10-03 6:38 ` [syzbot ci] Re: bpf: Extend bpf syscall with common attributes support syzbot ci
2025-10-03 6:44 ` Leon Hwang
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=53799ac8-7cb0-40df-96ca-7d1da039981c@linux.dev \
--to=leon.hwang@linux.dev \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
/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.