From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com>
Cc: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com,
andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, memxor@gmail.com,
martin.lau@kernel.org, mykyta.yatsenko5@gmail.com,
kernel-team@meta.com, ast@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev,
clm@meta.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 2/3] bpf: Compare parent_id in refsafe() for REF_TYPE_PTR
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2026 11:04:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6d86c2fae9be63eb110ebd5b3fc19bc4cf1de2dc.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMB2axOOG3ptDkWvTDpGut+EmDeroe3GPR3obb-Br_Dg1aGmgw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, 2026-06-05 at 10:57 -0700, Amery Hung wrote:
[...]
> Actually, looking at it a bit more. I think I would hold on changing
> check_ids().
>
> This patch should not increase idmap usage. parent_id refers to id and
> therefore check_ids(parent_id) will reuse an existing slot.
>
> The id_map is indeed more likely to be triggered since there is also
> an intermediate reference for reference dynptr introduce during the
> refactor, but that should still be very unlikely under normal usage.
> check_ids() also already fails in this scenario by returning false. So
> overall, I am not sure if we need to change it.
>
> WDYT?
I agree that it should be fine to just return false from check_ids()
if there is no space in the idmap. However, since not all ids
correspond to register/stack slots anymore, I think that
WARN_ON_ONCE(1) should be removed.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-05 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-04 22:09 [PATCH bpf-next v1 0/3] Object relationship refactor followup Amery Hung
2026-06-04 22:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 1/3] bpf: Fix dead error check on acquire_reference() in check_kfunc_call Amery Hung
2026-06-04 22:28 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-04 22:43 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-04 23:16 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-06-04 22:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 2/3] bpf: Compare parent_id in refsafe() for REF_TYPE_PTR Amery Hung
2026-06-04 22:23 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-04 22:59 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-04 23:21 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-06-04 23:27 ` Amery Hung
2026-06-05 17:57 ` Amery Hung
2026-06-05 18:04 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2026-06-05 18:09 ` Amery Hung
2026-06-04 22:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 3/3] selftests/bpf: Use bpf_dynptr_slice() to read file dynptr in leak test Amery Hung
2026-06-04 22:21 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-04 23:22 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-06-04 22:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 0/3] Object relationship refactor followup Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-04 23:20 ` Amery Hung
2026-06-05 21:20 ` 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=6d86c2fae9be63eb110ebd5b3fc19bc4cf1de2dc.camel@gmail.com \
--to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
--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=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=mykyta.yatsenko5@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@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.