From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailgw.kylinos.cn (mailgw.kylinos.cn [124.126.103.232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF31220322; Wed, 20 Aug 2025 09:26:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=124.126.103.232 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755682005; cv=none; b=Y3y8ptUcdMj1rlrK7nAJ0SANrpfiCukWq+LOdE58NSFCOdnCIxgikNP9m8EhI/tLvUaVEhVUPRrtMI2xajHYlJna33pEKcofTvGNH9uhhnTGc2hF+L4YzBH6KlFyUUc68SG7vwGXnr4fDTa1wWasIRLMsy7kiT2usUmP2r+qvP8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755682005; c=relaxed/simple; bh=2uU5ZrZ3dDyK5rPaTauckpsLKjSNLSaN7NEv0euQgVU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=dyYWJm+RKtomDa9EU/qiKBu5RinqiTQJGQeG196/gAkMCKGsY+e5kg4GuOxn5Nff4JML6LzYt/InKHVBnDwAyYQ3A0Ieymvu6yiZ5U+otvAyApE1NmbVaiqh4Bi3AtpFhRd8Ri3X9CI0+tfoiYW15CV/30QVj5Ejko6SpJ10LPU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kylinos.cn; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kylinos.cn; arc=none smtp.client-ip=124.126.103.232 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kylinos.cn Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kylinos.cn X-UUID: c4a19ca47da711f0b29709d653e92f7d-20250820 X-CID-P-RULE: Release_Ham X-CID-O-INFO: VERSION:1.1.45,REQID:fd378d40-514e-4215-996f-0aeebd413e45,IP:10, URL:0,TC:0,Content:0,EDM:0,RT:0,SF:-15,FILE:0,BULK:0,RULE:Release_Ham,ACTI ON:release,TS:-5 X-CID-INFO: VERSION:1.1.45,REQID:fd378d40-514e-4215-996f-0aeebd413e45,IP:10,UR L:0,TC:0,Content:0,EDM:0,RT:0,SF:-15,FILE:0,BULK:0,RULE:Release_Ham,ACTION :release,TS:-5 X-CID-META: VersionHash:6493067,CLOUDID:336d5cb5b5924752fdd99b4725ca7b31,BulkI D:250820145207GW1MRF9C,BulkQuantity:3,Recheck:0,SF:17|19|24|44|64|66|78|80 |81|82|83|102|841,TC:nil,Content:0|50,EDM:-3,IP:-2,URL:0,File:nil,RT:nil,B ulk:40,QS:nil,BEC:nil,COL:0,OSI:0,OSA:0,AV:0,LES:1,SPR:NO,DKR:0,DKP:0,BRR: 0,BRE:0,ARC:0 X-CID-BVR: 0,NGT X-CID-BAS: 0,NGT,0,_ X-CID-FACTOR: TF_CID_SPAM_SNR,TF_CID_SPAM_FAS,TF_CID_SPAM_FSD,TF_CID_SPAM_FSI X-UUID: c4a19ca47da711f0b29709d653e92f7d-20250820 X-User: duanchenghao@kylinos.cn Received: from localhost [(223.70.159.239)] by mailgw.kylinos.cn (envelope-from ) (Generic MTA with TLSv1.3 TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 256/256) with ESMTP id 382454535; Wed, 20 Aug 2025 17:26:36 +0800 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 17:26:28 +0800 From: Chenghao Duan To: Pu Lehui Cc: ast@kernel.org, bjorn@kernel.org, puranjay@kernel.org, paul.walmsley@sifive.com, palmer@dabbelt.com, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, eddyz87@gmail.com, song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me, haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org, alex@ghiti.fr, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: bpf: Fix uninitialized symbol 'retval_off' Message-ID: <20250820092628.GA1289807@chenghao-pc> References: <20250820062520.846720-1-duanchenghao@kylinos.cn> <8b836b6e-103a-41c2-b111-0417d8db4dce@huawei.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8b836b6e-103a-41c2-b111-0417d8db4dce@huawei.com> On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 02:52:01PM +0800, Pu Lehui wrote: > > > On 2025/8/20 14:25, Chenghao Duan wrote: > > In __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(), retval_off is only meaningful when > > save_ret is true, so the current logic is correct. However, in the > > lgtm, and same for `ip_off`, pls patch it together. I also checked at the time that ip_off is only initialized and assigned when flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_IP_ARG is true. However, I noticed that the use of ip_off also requires this condition, so the compiler did not issue a warning. Chenghao > > > original logic, retval_off is only initialized under certain > > conditions, which may cause a build warning. > > > > So initialize retval_off unconditionally to fix it. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chenghao Duan > > --- > > arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 5 ++--- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > > index 10e01ff06312..49bbda8372b0 100644 > > --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > > +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > > @@ -1079,10 +1079,9 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, > > stack_size += 16; > > save_ret = flags & (BPF_TRAMP_F_CALL_ORIG | BPF_TRAMP_F_RET_FENTRY_RET); > > - if (save_ret) { > > + if (save_ret) > > stack_size += 16; /* Save both A5 (BPF R0) and A0 */ > > - retval_off = stack_size; > > - } > > + retval_off = stack_size; > > stack_size += nr_arg_slots * 8; > > args_off = stack_size;