From: Jiayuan Chen <jiayuan.chen@linux.dev>
To: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org, geliang@kernel.org,
john.fastabend@gmail.com, jakub@cloudflare.com,
jiayuan.chen@linux.dev, edumazet@google.com,
ncardwell@google.com, kuniyu@google.com, davem@davemloft.net,
kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, horms@kernel.org,
matttbe@kernel.org, martineau@kernel.org
Cc: tanggeliang@kylinos.cn, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, mptcp@lists.linux.dev, ast@kernel.org,
andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, martin.lau@kernel.org,
eddyz87@gmail.com, yonghong.song@linux.dev, mason@kernel.org,
ihor.solodrai@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3] bpf: drop duplicate check_app_limited in tcp_bpf_push
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2026 19:46:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <08ff0ec5-55aa-46ae-a224-b2d02aa2979e@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b39121f2d0860a81719fb0b3f9b16bde9157bc043d7cc918497afc6d896877de@mail.kernel.org>
On 9/17/26 5:45 PM, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org wrote:
>> bpf: drop duplicate check_app_limited in tcp_bpf_push
>>
>> Before commit c5c37af6ecad9 ("tcp: Convert do_tcp_sendpages() to use
>> MSG_SPLICE_PAGES"), do_tcp_sendpages() did not call
>> tcp_rate_check_app_limited() internally, so callers needed an explicit
>> tcp_rate_check_app_limited() to cover it. That commit replaced
>> do_tcp_sendpages() with direct tcp_sendmsg_locked() calls, which perform
>> the check on every path that queues data. The outer call became redundant
>> but was left in place.
> This isn't a bug, but would it be clearer to cite ebf2e8860eea ("tcp_bpf:
> Inline do_tcp_sendpages as it's now a wrapper around tcp_sendmsg") as the
> commit that left the outer tcp_rate_check_app_limited() in tcp_bpf_push(),
> with c5c37af6ecad9 mentioned as the commit that moved the check inside
> do_tcp_sendpages()?
>
> Looking at the git history, c5c37af6ecad9 only touched net/ipv4/tcp.c and
> turned do_tcp_sendpages() into a wrapper that calls tcp_sendmsg_locked().
> The direct tcp_sendmsg_locked() call in tcp_bpf_push() was introduced by
> ebf2e8860eea, which kept the outer tcp_rate_check_app_limited(sk) while
> inlining the wrapper.
>
CI is right. ebf2e8860eea should be accurate.
> ---
> 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/35203307255
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-21 11:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-17 8:36 [PATCH bpf-next v3] bpf: drop duplicate check_app_limited in tcp_bpf_push Geliang Tang
2026-09-17 9:45 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-21 11:46 ` Jiayuan Chen [this message]
2026-09-22 11:09 ` Geliang Tang
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=08ff0ec5-55aa-46ae-a224-b2d02aa2979e@linux.dev \
--to=jiayuan.chen@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=geliang@kernel.org \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=jakub@cloudflare.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kuniyu@google.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=martineau@kernel.org \
--cc=mason@kernel.org \
--cc=matttbe@kernel.org \
--cc=mptcp@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ncardwell@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=tanggeliang@kylinos.cn \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox