Re: [RFC PATCH 7/8] selftests/bpf: add multi-stream sequentiality example model

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] Multi-line comment does not follow the required BPF subsystem comment style, starting on the same line as the opening '/*'.
--

commit d8df4bd81fa04615013e2f2662dbdb807cb8794c
Author: Tao Cui <cuitao@kylinos.cn>

selftests/bpf: add multi-stream sequentiality example model

This commit adds a second example cost model which replaces the single-cursor
sequentiality heuristic with a per-cgroup table of stream slots keyed by
iocg_id. This improves pricing accuracy for interleaved sequential readers
and windowed random IO.

> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/iocost_ms.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/iocost_ms.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..465fd5d5c62e0
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/iocost_ms.c
[ ... ]
> +/* VTIME_PER_SEC comes from vmlinux.h (a BTF enum constant) */
> +#define IOC_PAGE_SIZE		4096
> +#define IOCOST_COST_F_MERGE	(1ULL << 0)	/* not in BTF: a plain macro */
> +
> +/* DIV64_U64_ROUND_UP / DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL equivalents, folded at
> + * compile time */

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but does this multi-line comment follow the preferred
kernel comment style for the BPF subsystem? The BPF guidelines specify that
multi-line comments must have the opening /* on its own line, rather than
starting the text on the same line as the opening marker.

> +#define RU(x, y)		((x) / (y) + (((x) % (y)) ? 1 : 0))
> +
> +#define RBPS	174019176ULL

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260908100143.47598-1-cui.tao@linux.dev?part=7