From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (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 9B2DD343894 for ; Tue, 9 Jun 2026 18:43:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781030622; cv=none; b=Ri00DfNGA+YVkpL6iKgGRmJp/zE8EikT+0lTXCDt+P/ytlIax/gOthI9IyaKJLmZA40OVhprJ/qyIW2ijV1ZLOra5bYr1XF11BEUMrApGn4/tpRpkpP+YpTnNXoqTw6gkw7nMbzEe4FSE9huGcWs9J3Q9UFa5yz4fYy0bosa5yQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781030622; c=relaxed/simple; bh=3sZr8aWKz6NoWdAehVLqQ+NR9pLs06MWgGeDQdrwJHw=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=nr+zD5axYpLWr7JnR0EdI4nYAJQg3626UDEG2aBi/bSjzZ3pBGzrrsBe3DbyB3uodSwq/ytgRK1QNggkfvZgqKp4sLohMlWesPKCMTXesGcpxP3ANanrAvfvXiSCgv0PMB8n1DA3uWmX3yTxHKtQ/rlc8lelaTfUn2dsuPRQzcE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ArLq18bo; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ArLq18bo" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 623541F00898; Tue, 9 Jun 2026 18:43:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1781030621; bh=G1lsx8PpF2ufjmozjWFIbKdXkMTYjFFSmHIklIuJSIY=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=ArLq18boGoyyjTcl96mYFjICLO3ehxJxIKn8kiRFg+hfzO/aO5kCrk7akYjDYueJq EuZp+E9JYTDCvl5czOldvhWgtey0KlRGdTKYZ4KS8Fq2U3FYAql16/6pitHGJH7MNM KoTqCpGeyPjwjhJ4qvCeAeIy/U1upE4ssMbNqA5epJny9CWUdsxXlCkGHwQV+j27BK HrcxvOxI7Q6XrNVA5gAqZba8O2LHEzAerg/D77DqMsVARc0/Ieuu0xnQkUEwmrntZp nH+frgaNP461IGwelrRKL3ONdOwMVaMc073J9bhnZ3ThxDDXPi9eki2EqHXWoO0KPM vBgDcVYaUn9XA== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] selftests/bpf: Adjust fexit_bpf2bpf ctx layout for llvm23 true signature Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Yonghong Song" Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260609164002.1721294-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev> References: <20260609164002.1721294-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2026 18:43:40 +0000 Message-Id: <20260609184341.623541F00898@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: Pre-existing issues: - [Low] The modified multi-line comment retains text on the same line as th= e opening `/*`, violating the BPF subsystem comment style guidelines. -- commit 895b9c1828c7212301bcd7381a175a6b61a7df58 Author: Yonghong Song selftests/bpf: Adjust fexit_bpf2bpf ctx layout for llvm23 true signature This commit adjusts the fexit context layout for test_pkt_access_subprog2() to accommodate differences in how llvm23 records the function signature in BTF. It selects the matching arguments struct based on the compiler version to ensure compatibility. > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_bpf2bpf.c b/tools/te= sting/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_bpf2bpf.c > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_bpf2bpf.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_bpf2bpf.c > @@ -53,14 +53,23 @@ int BPF_PROG(test_subprog1, struct sk_buff *skb, int = ret) > * r0 =3D *(u32 *)(r1 + 0) > * w0 <<=3D 1 > * exit > - * In such case the verifier falls back to conservative and > + * Before llvm23, in such case the verifier falls back to conservative a= nd > * tracing program can access arguments and return value as u64 > - * instead of accurate types. > + * instead of accurate types. With llvm23, the true signature > + * int test_pkt_access_subprog2(volatile struct __sk_buff *skb) > + * is available in btf. > */ [Severity: Low] This is a pre-existing issue, but since this multi-line comment block is being modified, could we update its opening to comply with the current BPF subsystem style rules? The guidelines prefer the opening /* to be on its own line, rather than keeping text on the same line. [ ... ] --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260609163947.1717= 694-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev?part=3D3