Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/2] selftests/bpf: Fix tests for llvm23 true signature

[patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org]

Hello:

This series was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (master)
by Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>:

On Tue,  9 Jun 2026 16:34:02 -0700 you wrote:
> LLVM23 ([1]) records the 'true' function signature in BTF, i.e. the
> signature inferred after optimization rather than the one written in C.
> This caused two kinds of selftest failures (see below).
> 
> Case 1: keep int return type for tailcall subprogs
> 
> The verifier requires any subprog that issues a bpf_tail_call to return
> an 'int' (see check_btf_func() in kernel/bpf/check_btf.c, which rejects
> it with "tail_call is only allowed in functions that return 'int'").
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [bpf-next,v2,1/2] selftests/bpf: Keep int return type for tailcall subprogs
    https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/be1d838b88e4
  - [bpf-next,v2,2/2] selftests/bpf: Adjust fexit_bpf2bpf ctx layout for llvm23 true signature
    https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/e775c522a455

You are awesome, thank you!
-- 
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html