All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
To: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
	eddyz87@gmail.com, kernel-team@fb.com, martin.lau@kernel.org,
	clm@meta.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 05/11] bpf: Report which member makes a kfunc return type unsupported
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2026 10:45:47 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6577c990-f491-43fd-bcef-314160ea5c77@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a9b017abf99b3c4062bdb77e8fbbfbb7dff502ddf0b6f0b4bc459cb28a4cac8e@mail.kernel.org>



On 8/27/26 12:04 AM, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org wrote:
>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>> index 90139f1b78d10..967ad010b3222 100644
>> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>> @@ -11646,6 +11646,15 @@ static bool is_kfunc_arg_implicit(const struct bpf_call_arg_meta *meta, u32 arg_
>>   	return argn <= arg_idx;
>>   }
>>
>> +#define BTF_MEMBER_MAX_DEPTH	4
>> +#define BTF_MEMBER_PATH_LEN	64
>> +
>> +struct btf_member_path {
>> +	const struct btf_member *member[BTF_MEMBER_MAX_DEPTH];
>> +	int depth;
>> +	bool too_deep;
>> +};
>> +
> [ ... ]
>
>> @@ -11676,31 +11686,42 @@ static bool btf_struct_member_walk(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, const struct bt
>>
>>   		member_type = btf_type_skip_modifiers(btf, member->type, NULL);
>>   		if (btf_type_is_struct(member_type)) {
>> -			if (rec >= 3) {
>> +			if (rec >= BTF_MEMBER_MAX_DEPTH - 1) {
>>   				verbose(env, "max struct nesting depth exceeded\n");
>> +				if (path)
>> +					path->too_deep = true;
>>   				return false;
>>   			}
>> -			if (!btf_struct_member_walk(env, btf, member_type, member_kinds, rec + 1))
>> -				return false;
>> +			if (!btf_struct_member_walk(env, btf, member_type, member_kinds,
>> +						    rec + 1, path))
>> +				goto bad_path;
>>   			continue;
>>   		}
>>   		if (btf_type_is_array(member_type)) {
>>   			array = btf_array(member_type);
>>   			if (!array->nelems)
>> -				return false;
>> +				goto bad_member;
>>   			member_type = btf_type_skip_modifiers(btf, array->type, NULL);
>>   		}
>>   		if (!btf_member_kind_allowed(btf, member_type, member_kinds))
>> -			return false;
>> +			goto bad_member;
>>   	}
>>   	return true;
>> +
>> +bad_member:
>> +	if (path)
>> +		path->depth = rec + 1;
>> +bad_path:
>> +	if (path && path->depth)
>> +		path->member[rec] = member;
>> +	return false;
>>   }
> [ ... ]
>
>> @@ -14077,17 +14114,46 @@ static int check_kfunc_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn,
>>   		    meta.func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_res_spin_lock_irqsave]))
>>   			__mark_reg_const_zero(env, &regs[BPF_REG_0]);
>>   	} else if (btf_type_is_struct(t)) {
>> +		struct btf_member_path path = {};
>> +		const char *member_note = "";
>> +
>>   		/*
>>   		 * The returned struct comes back as raw register bits modeled
>>   		 * as an unknown scalar, so it must contain only scalars:
>>   		 * otherwise a pointer field would be laundered into a scalar
>>   		 * and escape provenance and reference tracking.
>>   		 */
>> -		if (!btf_type_is_scalar_struct(env, desc_btf, t)) {
>> +		if (!btf_struct_member_walk(env, desc_btf, t, BTF_MEMBER_SCALAR, 0, &path)) {
>>   			verbose(env,
>>   				"kernel function %s returns %s %s that is not composed of scalars\n",
>>   				func_name, btf_type_str(t),
>>   				btf_name_by_offset(desc_btf, t->name_off));
>> +			if (path.too_deep) {
>> +				member_note = bpf_diag_fmt(
>> +					env, " It nests structs more than %d levels deep.",
>> +					BTF_MEMBER_MAX_DEPTH);
>> +			} else if (path.depth) {
>> +				const struct btf_member *bad = path.member[path.depth - 1];
>> +				char bad_name[BTF_MEMBER_PATH_LEN];
>> +				const struct btf_type *bad_type;
>> +
>> +				btf_member_path_str(desc_btf, &path, bad_name, sizeof(bad_name));
>> +				bad_type = btf_type_skip_modifiers(desc_btf, bad->type, NULL);
>> +				verbose(env, "member '%s' has type %s\n", bad_name,
>> +					btf_type_str(bad_type));
> For an array member, does this report the type that the walk actually
> rejected?
>
> Looking at btf_struct_member_walk(), when the member is an array it
> resolves the element type before testing it:
>
>      if (btf_type_is_array(member_type)) {
>          array = btf_array(member_type);
>          if (!array->nelems)
>              goto bad_member;
>          member_type = btf_type_skip_modifiers(btf, array->type, NULL);
>      }
>      if (!btf_member_kind_allowed(btf, member_type, member_kinds))
>          goto bad_member;
>
> The walk stores only the struct member itself in the path, discarding
> the resolved element type. So for a kfunc returning:
>
>      struct s { void *p[2]; };
>
> the walk rejects the element type PTR, but this diagnostic derives
> bad_type from bad->type (the array type), printing:
>
>      member 'p' has type ARRAY
>      ... Its member 'p' is ARRAY, not a scalar.
>
> That contradicts the rule documented earlier ("An array member counts
> as its element type") and the accepted behaviour of __u64 a[2], which
> passes. The same issue affects struct inner arr[2] (reported as ARRAY,
> real reason is the element is a non-scalar struct) and zero-length
> arrays, whose rejection has nothing to do with type at all.

This is indeed a problem. Will fix.

>
> This is confined to verifier log text - the accept/reject decision is
> unchanged - but the message the patch exists to add is inaccurate for
> array members.
>
>> +				member_note = bpf_diag_fmt(
>> +					env, " Its member '%s' is %s, not a scalar.", bad_name,
>> +					btf_type_str(bad_type));
>> +			}
> [ ... ]
>
>
> ---
> 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/33045482525


  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-28 17:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-27  6:11 [PATCH bpf-next v3 00/11] bpf: Allow arena pointers in by-value returns Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  6:11 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 01/11] bpf: Record each half of a paired return value in verifier diagnostics Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  6:11 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 02/11] bpf: Drop the recursion depth argument of btf_type_is_scalar_struct() Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  7:04   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-28 17:39     ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  6:11 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 03/11] bpf: Add btf_type_is_arena_ptr() Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  6:11 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 04/11] bpf: Let the by-value struct walk take the kinds of member it accepts Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  6:11 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 05/11] bpf: Report which member makes a kfunc return type unsupported Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  7:04   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-28 17:45     ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2026-08-27  6:11 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 06/11] bpf: Allow a global function to return arena pointers by value Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  6:33   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-28 18:00     ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  6:11 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 07/11] bpf: Allow arena pointers in a by-value kfunc return Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  6:55   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-28 18:10     ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  6:11 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 08/11] selftests/bpf: Check the member named for an unsupported kfunc return type Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  7:04   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-28 18:20     ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  6:12 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 09/11] selftests/bpf: Test global functions returning arena pointers by value Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  7:04   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-28 18:26     ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  6:12 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 10/11] selftests/bpf: Test kfuncs " Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  7:17   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-28 18:28     ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-27  6:12 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 11/11] docs/bpf: Document arena pointers in a by-value return Yonghong Song

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=6577c990-f491-43fd-bcef-314160ea5c77@linux.dev \
    --to=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=clm@meta.com \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
    /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.