public inbox for bpf@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
	yonghong.song@linux.dev, song@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com,
	qmo@kernel.org, dxu@dxuuu.xyz, leon.hwang@linux.dev,
	kernel-patches-bot@fb.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/8] bpf: Drop duplicate blank lines in verifier
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2026 21:24:13 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260414132421.63409-2-leon.hwang@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260414132421.63409-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev>

There are many adjacent blank lines in the verifier that have accumulated
over time.

Drop them for cleanup.

No functional changes intended.

Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 18 ------------------
 1 file changed, 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 9e4980128151..1757c5720503 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -513,7 +513,6 @@ static bool helper_multiple_ref_obj_use(enum bpf_func_id func_id,
 	return ref_obj_uses > 1;
 }
 
-
 static bool is_spi_bounds_valid(struct bpf_func_state *state, int spi, int nr_slots)
 {
        int allocated_slots = state->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE;
@@ -619,7 +618,6 @@ static void __mark_dynptr_reg(struct bpf_reg_state *reg,
 			      enum bpf_dynptr_type type,
 			      bool first_slot, int dynptr_id);
 
-
 static void mark_dynptr_stack_regs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 				   struct bpf_reg_state *sreg1,
 				   struct bpf_reg_state *sreg2,
@@ -1655,7 +1653,6 @@ static bool same_callsites(struct bpf_verifier_state *a, struct bpf_verifier_sta
 	return true;
 }
 
-
 void bpf_free_backedges(struct bpf_scc_visit *visit)
 {
 	struct bpf_scc_backedge *backedge, *next;
@@ -2625,7 +2622,6 @@ static struct bpf_verifier_state *push_async_cb(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 	return &elem->st;
 }
 
-
 static int cmp_subprogs(const void *a, const void *b)
 {
 	return ((struct bpf_subprog_info *)a)->start -
@@ -3679,7 +3675,6 @@ static bool is_spillable_regtype(enum bpf_reg_type type)
 	}
 }
 
-
 /* check if register is a constant scalar value */
 static bool is_reg_const(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, bool subreg32)
 {
@@ -4347,7 +4342,6 @@ static int check_stack_read(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 	return err;
 }
 
-
 /* check_stack_write dispatches to check_stack_write_fixed_off or
  * check_stack_write_var_off.
  *
@@ -5033,7 +5027,6 @@ static int check_sock_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx,
 		valid = false;
 	}
 
-
 	if (valid) {
 		env->insn_aux_data[insn_idx].ctx_field_size =
 			info.ctx_field_size;
@@ -6836,7 +6829,6 @@ static int check_stack_range_initialized(
 	if (err)
 		return err;
 
-
 	if (tnum_is_const(reg->var_off)) {
 		min_off = max_off = reg->var_off.value + off;
 	} else {
@@ -7541,7 +7533,6 @@ static bool is_iter_new_kfunc(struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta *meta)
 	return meta->kfunc_flags & KF_ITER_NEW;
 }
 
-
 static bool is_iter_destroy_kfunc(struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta *meta)
 {
 	return meta->kfunc_flags & KF_ITER_DESTROY;
@@ -10459,7 +10450,6 @@ static int check_helper_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn
 		if (!reg)
 			return -EFAULT;
 
-
 		if (meta.dynptr_id) {
 			verifier_bug(env, "meta.dynptr_id already set");
 			return -EFAULT;
@@ -10798,7 +10788,6 @@ static bool is_kfunc_release(struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta *meta)
 	return meta->kfunc_flags & KF_RELEASE;
 }
 
-
 static bool is_kfunc_destructive(struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta *meta)
 {
 	return meta->kfunc_flags & KF_DESTRUCTIVE;
@@ -11571,7 +11560,6 @@ static int process_irq_flag(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
 	return 0;
 }
 
-
 static int ref_set_non_owning(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
 {
 	struct btf_record *rec = reg_btf_record(reg);
@@ -16715,7 +16703,6 @@ static int check_ld_abs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-
 static bool return_retval_range(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_retval_range *range)
 {
 	enum bpf_prog_type prog_type = resolve_prog_type(env->prog);
@@ -18587,8 +18574,6 @@ static void release_insn_arrays(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 		bpf_insn_array_release(env->insn_array_maps[i]);
 }
 
-
-
 /* The verifier does more data flow analysis than llvm and will not
  * explore branches that are dead at run time. Malicious programs can
  * have dead code too. Therefore replace all dead at-run-time code
@@ -18616,8 +18601,6 @@ static void sanitize_dead_code(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 	}
 }
 
-
-
 static void free_states(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 {
 	struct bpf_verifier_state_list *sl;
@@ -18880,7 +18863,6 @@ static int do_check_main(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 	return ret;
 }
 
-
 static void print_verification_stats(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 {
 	int i;
-- 
2.53.0


  reply	other threads:[~2026-04-14 13:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-14 13:24 [PATCH bpf-next v4 0/8] bpf: Introduce global percpu data Leon Hwang
2026-04-14 13:24 ` Leon Hwang [this message]
2026-04-14 13:24 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/8] " Leon Hwang
2026-04-14 14:10   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-14 14:19     ` Leon Hwang
2026-04-15  2:19       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-04-17  1:30         ` Leon Hwang
2026-04-17 15:48           ` Leon Hwang
2026-04-17 17:03             ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-04-14 13:24 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 3/8] libbpf: Probe percpu data feature Leon Hwang
2026-04-14 13:24 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 4/8] libbpf: Add support for global percpu data Leon Hwang
2026-04-14 13:24 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 5/8] bpf: Update per-CPU maps using BPF_F_ALL_CPUS flag Leon Hwang
2026-04-14 21:02   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-17  1:54     ` Leon Hwang
2026-04-15  2:21   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-04-17  1:33     ` Leon Hwang
2026-04-17 16:07       ` Leon Hwang
2026-04-14 13:24 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 6/8] bpftool: Generate skeleton for global percpu data Leon Hwang
2026-04-14 21:26   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-17  2:01     ` Leon Hwang
2026-04-14 13:24 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 7/8] selftests/bpf: Add tests to verify " Leon Hwang
2026-04-14 21:45   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-17  2:06     ` Leon Hwang
2026-04-14 13:24 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 8/8] selftests/bpf: Add a test to verify bpf_iter for " Leon Hwang
2026-04-14 22:08   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-17  2:17     ` Leon Hwang

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=20260414132421.63409-2-leon.hwang@linux.dev \
    --to=leon.hwang@linux.dev \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=dxu@dxuuu.xyz \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-patches-bot@fb.com \
    --cc=qmo@kernel.org \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --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