From: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@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>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@fb.com>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: Warn with new bpf_unreachable() kfunc maybe due to uninitialized var
Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 11:13:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b32cd638-5ba1-4af5-80e6-3103786a7c8e@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAADnVQJurPs_e3Lx9O7qZ+=HPk7XarXoGXeTiARbw8bW+-txGA@mail.gmail.com>
On 5/16/25 5:31 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 2:17 PM Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev> wrote:
>>
>> So I then decided to add an 'exit' insn after bpf_unreachable() in llvm.
>> See latest https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131731 (commit #2).
>> So we won't have any control flow issues in code. With newer llvm change,
> That's a good idea. Certainly better than special case this 'noreturn'
> semantic in the verifier.
Current latest llvm21 will cause kernel build failure:
https://patchew.org/linux/20250506-default-const-init-clang-v2-1-fcfb69703264@kernel.org/
I will wait for the fix in bpf-next and then submit v3.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-17 18:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-15 20:06 [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: Warn with new bpf_unreachable() kfunc maybe due to uninitialized var Yonghong Song
2025-05-15 20:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add a test with bpf_unreachable() kfunc Yonghong Song
2025-05-17 8:45 ` kernel test robot
2025-05-15 22:42 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: Warn with new bpf_unreachable() kfunc maybe due to uninitialized var Alexei Starovoitov
2025-05-16 21:17 ` Yonghong Song
2025-05-16 21:31 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-05-17 18:13 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2025-05-18 15:41 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-05-19 0:09 ` 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=b32cd638-5ba1-4af5-80e6-3103786a7c8e@linux.dev \
--to=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--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.