From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Maxim Khmelevskii" <max@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] s390/bpf: Enable atomics tests for s390
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 14:12:25 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260723141226.4CB081F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260723140648.583055-8-max@linux.ibm.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] Meaningful code and commit message mismatch: failure to reuse CAN_USE_LOAD_ACQ_STORE_REL in arena_atomics.c.
--
--- Patch [3]: [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] s390/bpf: Enable atomics tests for s390 ---
commit c1e0ed2dde3c2d83049962c67b540464ea7a24d3
Author: Maxim Khmelevskii <max@linux.ibm.com>
s390/bpf: Enable atomics tests for s390
This commit adds s390 to the list of supported architectures for atomics
tests and updates CAN_USE_LOAD_ACQ_STORE_REL in bpf_misc.h.
> Reuse CAN_USE_LOAD_ACQ_STORE_REL in arena_atomics selftest,
> to remove code duplication.
[Severity: Medium]
Is this description accurate for the changes actually made in arena_atomics.c?
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/arena_atomics.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/arena_atomics.c
> index 2e7751a853999..73bc2b835f3fe 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/arena_atomics.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/arena_atomics.c
> @@ -28,8 +28,10 @@ bool skip_all_tests = true;
>
> #if defined(ENABLE_ATOMICS_TESTS) && \
> defined(__BPF_FEATURE_ADDR_SPACE_CAST) && \
> - (defined(__TARGET_ARCH_arm64) || defined(__TARGET_ARCH_x86) || \
> - (defined(__TARGET_ARCH_riscv) && __riscv_xlen == 64))
> + (defined(__TARGET_ARCH_arm64) || \
> + defined(__TARGET_ARCH_x86) || \
> + (defined(__TARGET_ARCH_riscv) && __riscv_xlen == 64) || \
> + defined(__TARGET_ARCH_s390))
[Severity: Medium]
Could this #if block use CAN_USE_LOAD_ACQ_STORE_REL as mentioned in the
commit message, instead of manually expanding the architecture list?
By not using the macro, it appears that powerpc and loongarch support
defined in bpf_misc.h are omitted in these checks. This manual expansion
also seems to be duplicated in load_acquire() and store_release() later
in the patch.
[ ... ]
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260723140648.583055-5-max@linux.ibm.com?part=3
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-23 14:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-23 14:03 [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] s390/bpf: Support load-acquire and store-release instructions Maxim Khmelevskii
2026-07-23 14:03 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] s390/bpf: Add emit_ldx and emit_stx functions Maxim Khmelevskii
2026-07-23 15:08 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-07-23 14:03 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] s390/bpf: Support load-acquire and store-release instructions Maxim Khmelevskii
2026-07-23 14:03 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] s390/bpf: Enable atomics tests for s390 Maxim Khmelevskii
2026-07-23 14:12 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
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=20260723141226.4CB081F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=max@linux.ibm.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