[PATCH bpf-next v11 0/7] bpf-core changes for preparation of

[Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>]

Hi,

well, given that the HID changes haven't moved a lot in the past
revisions and that I am cc-ing a bunch of people, I have dropped them
while we focus on the last 2 requirements in bpf-core changes.

I'll submit a HID targeted series when we get these in tree, which
would make things a lore more independent.

For reference, the whole reasons for these 2 main changes are at
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220902132938.2409206-1-benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com/

Compared to v10 (in addition of dropping the HID changes), I have
changed the selftests so we can test both light skeletons and libbbpf
calls.

Cheers,
Benjamin

Benjamin Tissoires (7):
  selftests/bpf: regroup and declare similar kfuncs selftests in an
    array
  bpf: split btf_check_subprog_arg_match in two
  bpf/verifier: allow all functions to read user provided context
  selftests/bpf: add test for accessing ctx from syscall program type
  bpf/btf: bump BTF_KFUNC_SET_MAX_CNT
  bpf/verifier: allow kfunc to return an allocated mem
  selftests/bpf: Add tests for kfunc returning a memory pointer

 include/linux/bpf.h                           |  11 +-
 include/linux/bpf_verifier.h                  |   2 +
 include/linux/btf.h                           |  10 +
 kernel/bpf/btf.c                              | 149 ++++++++++--
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c                         |  66 +++--
 net/bpf/test_run.c                            |  37 +++
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile          |   5 +-
 .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c     | 227 ++++++++++++++++--
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/kfunc_call_fail.c     | 160 ++++++++++++
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/kfunc_call_test.c     |  71 ++++++
 10 files changed, 678 insertions(+), 60 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kfunc_call_fail.c

-- 
2.36.1