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 A4EDF34751B for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2026 19:51:32 +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=1786132293; cv=none; b=egciUGNYHLHXt7dmGCXipB4/2CcDy6Klv+BXfYy2I/9YZILOY4zue6AiPrJhBH3HH6I65YrMM7krn7Rxf5UIzG927XRK4wZaLOXm7x8n4rFcGrKG3BicFFWBPD6m7op+3fJUG++bORl6b77TrBl/pAu6G2lweH9u1zgSxO58hTU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786132293; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wZxy+hJcU7MOVjwhO/q7BaISLo7QmjKenTNxBmZ3eMk=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=Q29cgzkRFW51XHcBlnMRgOBhffA3szZQapIWqpUZ7tVQ9CNBRKt3ldJzRTziivNt+biluYrfRlmP1wtma4/KlACG0CEFL6cP0OPmRiqZPLFlxd5hKOs5s+I77+Qi2k0bTemhAmmWdKkvWfhZO48Fzn4IT4amnfNCJf2rJrKM+Ng= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=EVL93weG; 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="EVL93weG" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 13DB11F000E9; Fri, 7 Aug 2026 19:51:32 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1786132292; bh=wZxy+hJcU7MOVjwhO/q7BaISLo7QmjKenTNxBmZ3eMk=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=EVL93weGEFNbYnfK2uPOikVhH8HaTA5m2TtjtDsNxJoiLw5YcHwa2HVtb1kLxS2y4 QwRK4750G2RjIp7IxeWL4qxQwH5Iof6Fga1MOtMobZoITSiDlE3nnD/RfjypyWphM+ UvOXlA3ALyVjaQEWOC/6EWDEi1VPDpEtueRdjBvhymyiFJVY0wFUIr5wqleu3sDPqD kODrG3GTGWvAO6t1KKAG4RdPGxT1GvR6+9xw37qR6L6B43jl5DmkFk6DtmzyfNFbJG /7VPe1Wa5g6eBcW6fc47Ljf3sqC3ZvFZx9UvHUFFVmxxbVER3Cj4QbBasiK6UbRnEs t7erEyxbnbU7g== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/bpf: add test for blkcg io.stat BPF kfuncs Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Ziyang Men" Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mkoutny@suse.com, tj@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260807193732.4073299-3-ziyang.meme@gmail.com> References: <20260807193732.4073299-1-ziyang.meme@gmail.com> <20260807193732.4073299-3-ziyang.meme@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2026 19:51:31 +0000 Message-Id: <20260807195132.13DB11F000E9@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: - [Low] Multi-line comment violates the BPF subsystem comment style guideli= nes. -- --- Patch [2]: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/bpf: add test for blkcg io.stat BPF kf= uncs --- commit 0012ecaba2bee2bf79e38a8039b4f591d01a624b Author: Ziyang Men selftests/bpf: add test for blkcg io.stat BPF kfuncs This commit adds a cgroup_iter_io selftest for the block I/O controller BPF kfuncs. It uses a BPF iterator program to flush stats and read io.stat counters for a target device, comparing the results against the cgroup's io.stat file. It also validates the root cgroup's block stats. > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/cgroup_iter_io.c b/tools/t= esting/selftests/bpf/progs/cgroup_iter_io.c > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000000..b839def945086 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/cgroup_iter_io.c [ ... ] > +/* Set to 1 by cgroup_root_blkcg_query when bpf_get_root_blkcg() succeed= s. */ > +__u64 got_root_blkcg SEC(".data.query"); > + > +/* Device to read, set by userspace (kernel dev_t). Pinning the device k= eeps > + * the read deterministic and lets the value be compared to io.stat exac= tly. > + */ > +__u64 target_dev SEC(".data.query"); [Severity: Low] This isn't a bug, but does this multi-line comment follow the preferred BPF subsystem formatting rules? The guidelines for files under the BPF subsystem require the opening /* to be placed on its own line before the text begins for multi-line comments. [ ... ] --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260807193732.4073= 299-1-ziyang.meme@gmail.com?part=3D2