Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 3/3] veristat: Report max stack depth

[Paul Chaignon <paul.chaignon@gmail.com>]

On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 04:23:48PM -0700, Eduard Zingerman wrote:
> On Wed, 2026-05-13 at 21:35 +0200, Paul Chaignon wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > @@ -834,6 +835,7 @@ static struct stat_def {
> >  	[SIZE] = { "Program size", {"prog_size"}, },
> >  	[JITED_SIZE] = { "Jited size", {"prog_size_jited"}, },
> >  	[STACK] = {"Stack depth", {"stack_depth", "stack"}, },
> > +	[MAX_STACK] = {"Max stack depth", {"max_stack_depth"}, },
> >  	[PROG_TYPE] = { "Program type", {"prog_type"}, },
> >  	[ATTACH_TYPE] = { "Attach type", {"attach_type", }, },
> >  	[MEMORY_PEAK] = { "Peak memory (MiB)", {"mem_peak", }, },
> > @@ -1023,7 +1025,7 @@ static int parse_verif_log(char * const buf, size_t buf_sz, struct verif_stats *
> >  				&s->stats[MARK_READ_MAX_LEN]))
> >  			continue;
> >  
> > -		if (1 == sscanf(cur, "stack depth %511s", stack))
> > +		if (2 == sscanf(cur, "stack depth %511s max %ld", stack, &s->stats[MAX_STACK]))
> >  			continue;
> >  	}
> >  	while ((token = strtok_r(cnt++ ? NULL : stack, "+", &state))) {
> 
> Thinking about it some more I think that the meaning of the
> STACK/"Stack depth" metric should swapped for max stack depth.

Hm, I was a bit worried that might be considered a breaking change
(ex., if someone is tracking the STACK metric over time), but if you
think it's alright, I can send a followup to replace STACK with
MAX_STACK. I agree it would be better as the STACK metric may not
correspond to anything real at the moment (ex., if the callgraph may be
all flat).

> 
> [...]