BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi" <memxor@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 10/17] bpf: Report Resource Lifetime reference leaks
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2026 06:45:36 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260605064536.DE3F51F00893@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260605063412.974640-11-memxor@gmail.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] Incorrect indentation of `bpf_diag_report_resource_state` calls inside `process_irq_flag`.
--

commit 55651d7f9fb67183b2ac504e84a853783f31d0f3
Author: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>

bpf: Report Resource Lifetime reference leaks

This commit augments the verifier's reference leak detection by adding a
Resource Lifetime Safety report when a reference is still live at program
exit or throw time. It also adds detailed diagnostic reporting for invalid
resource states involving dynptrs, IRQ flags, spin locks, and iterators.

> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index e9c121892b7e5..1c26614bec2b7 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -11576,6 +11665,11 @@ static int process_irq_flag(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_reg_state *
>  		if (!is_irq_flag_reg_valid_uninit(env, reg)) {
>  			verbose(env, "expected uninitialized irq flag as %s\n",
>  				reg_arg_name(env, argno));
> +				bpf_diag_report_resource_state(env, env->insn_idx,
> +							       "IRQ flag is already initialized",
> +							       "Saving IRQ state requires an uninitialized stack slot for the IRQ flag, but this slot already contains tracked IRQ flag "
> +							       "state.",
> +							       "Use a fresh stack slot for this save operation, or restore the existing IRQ flag before reusing the slot.");

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but it looks like there's an extra level of indentation
added to the bpf_diag_report_resource_state() call here. Should this be
adjusted to align with the verbose() call above it?

>  			return -EINVAL;
>  		}
>  
> @@ -11592,6 +11686,10 @@ static int process_irq_flag(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_reg_state *
>  		if (err) {
>  			verbose(env, "expected an initialized irq flag as %s\n",
>  				reg_arg_name(env, argno));
> +				bpf_diag_report_resource_state(env, env->insn_idx,
> +							       "uninitialized IRQ flag restore",
> +							       "Restoring IRQ state requires a stack slot that was initialized by a matching IRQ save operation on this path.",
> +							       "Pass the same stack slot that was previously initialized by the matching IRQ save kfunc.");

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but this call also appears to have an extra level of
indentation.

>  			return err;
>  		}

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260605063412.974640-1-memxor@gmail.com?part=10

  reply	other threads:[~2026-06-05  6:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-05  6:33 [PATCH bpf-next v1 00/17] Redesign Verification Errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 01/17] bpf: Add verifier diagnostics report helpers Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:42   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05  7:40   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-05 18:58   ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-06-05  6:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 02/17] bpf: Define verifier diagnostic categories Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05 19:10   ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-06-05  6:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 03/17] bpf: Add source and instruction diagnostic context Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  8:48   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05 20:22   ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-06-05 20:55     ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05 21:07       ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-06-05  6:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 04/17] bpf: Track verifier branch diagnostic history Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:50   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05  7:57   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-05 21:41     ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-06-05 21:37   ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-06-05  6:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 05/17] bpf: Track verifier register " Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:53   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05  7:40   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-05 22:31   ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-06-05  6:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 06/17] bpf: Track verifier reference " Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 07/17] bpf: Track verifier context " Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:46   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05  7:22   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-05  6:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 08/17] bpf: Report Register Type Safety errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:57   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05  7:23   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-05  6:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 09/17] bpf: Report Memory Safety bounds errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:45   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05  7:57   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-05  6:34 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 10/17] bpf: Report Resource Lifetime reference leaks Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:45   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-06-05  7:22   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-05  6:34 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 11/17] bpf: Report Call Type Safety argument errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:47   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05  7:23   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-05  6:34 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 12/17] bpf: Report Execution Context Safety errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:46   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05  7:23   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-05  6:34 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 13/17] bpf: Report Program Structure CFG errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:51   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05  7:22   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-05  6:34 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 14/17] bpf: Report Policy helper and kfunc errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  7:02   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05  6:34 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 15/17] bpf: Report Verifier Limit errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:53   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05  7:40   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-05  6:34 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 16/17] bpf: Report Verifier Internal errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:34 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 17/17] bpf: Gate verifier diagnostics on log level Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-06-05  6:58   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05  7:40   ` bot+bpf-ci

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=20260605064536.DE3F51F00893@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.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