From: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
To: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
eddyz87@gmail.com, kernel-team@fb.com, martin.lau@kernel.org,
clm@meta.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 01/10] bpf: Record each half of a paired return value in verifier diagnostics
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2026 10:08:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47991bc5-5f31-4cf0-a979-245e75d6bad7@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0406cb29c1419b2bdf8ab69ca7c14ffe6a5dacde23a387b9b43071e6017cf423@mail.kernel.org>
On 8/25/26 2:59 PM, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org wrote:
>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>> index e036ae20bf6b9..9aa29c3670087 100644
>> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>> @@ -10403,10 +10403,14 @@ static int prepare_func_exit(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int *insn_idx)
>> * return to the caller whatever the callee had in the
>> * return register(s)
>> */
>> - bpf_diag_mod_begin(env, &caller->regs[BPF_REG_0], r0, BPF_DIAG_MOD_WRITE);
>> - for (i = 0; i < nregs; i++)
>> - caller->regs[ret_regs[i]] = callee->regs[ret_regs[i]];
>> - bpf_diag_mod_end(env);
>> + for (i = 0; i < nregs; i++) {
>> + u32 regno = ret_regs[i];
>> +
>> + bpf_diag_mod_begin(env, &caller->regs[regno], &callee->regs[regno],
>> + BPF_DIAG_MOD_WRITE);
>> + caller->regs[regno] = callee->regs[regno];
>> + bpf_diag_mod_end(env);
>> + }
>> }
>>
>> /* for callbacks like bpf_loop or bpf_for_each_map_elem go back to callsite,
> This fix looks correct for prepare_func_exit(). Should check_func_call()
> and check_kfunc_call() get the same per-return-register diagnostic scope,
> or is R2 intentionally left out there?
>
> Commit 0630ad00d96d introduced the same pattern in three places, and this
> patch addresses only prepare_func_exit().
>
> In check_func_call(), the global-subprog path has:
>
> bpf_diag_mod_begin(env, &caller->regs[BPF_REG_0], NULL, BPF_DIAG_MOD_WRITE);
> ...
> nregs = bpf_ret_reg_pair(env, subprog) ? 2 : 1;
> for (i = 0; i < nregs; i++)
> mark_reg_unknown(env, caller->regs, ret_regs[i]);
> bpf_diag_mod_end(env);
>
> When nregs is 2, mark_reg_unknown() writes into caller->regs[BPF_REG_2],
> but the scope target is caller->regs[BPF_REG_0], so the write emits no
> BPF_DIAG_HISTORY_MOD event.
>
> Similarly in check_kfunc_call():
>
> bpf_diag_mod_begin(env, ®s[BPF_REG_0], NULL, BPF_DIAG_MOD_WRITE);
> ...
> mark_kfunc_ret_regs(env, regs, t->size); /* writes R0 and, for 8 < size <= 16, R2 */
> ...
> bpf_diag_mod_end(env);
>
> When t->size is between 8 and 16 bytes, mark_kfunc_ret_regs() writes the
> second half into R2, but again with no MOD event.
>
> In both cases R2 does get a BPF_DIAG_MOD_CALLER_SAVED scrub record, so
> the history shows R2 as clobbered by the call but never shows it being
> written with the second half of the return value.
Yes, I need to add these two cases for bpf_diag_mod.
>
>
> ---
> AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug.
> See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md
>
> CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/32899532405
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-26 17:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-25 20:54 [PATCH bpf-next v2 00/10] bpf: Allow arena pointers in by-value returns Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 20:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 01/10] bpf: Record each half of a paired return value in verifier diagnostics Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 21:59 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-26 17:08 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2026-08-25 20:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 02/10] bpf: Drop the recursion depth argument of btf_type_is_scalar_struct() Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 20:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 03/10] bpf: Add btf_type_is_arena_ptr() Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 21:59 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-26 17:28 ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 20:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 04/10] bpf: Let the by-value struct walk take the kinds of member it accepts Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 21:59 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-26 17:39 ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 20:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 05/10] bpf: Report which member makes a kfunc return type unsupported Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 21:59 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-26 17:59 ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 20:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 06/10] bpf: Allow a global function to return arena pointers by value Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 21:12 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-26 18:40 ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 20:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 07/10] bpf: Allow arena pointers in a by-value kfunc return Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 22:13 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-26 18:57 ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 20:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 08/10] selftests/bpf: Check the member named for an unsupported kfunc return type Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 20:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 09/10] selftests/bpf: Test global functions returning arena pointers by value Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 21:59 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-27 3:46 ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 20:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 10/10] selftests/bpf: Test kfuncs " Yonghong Song
2026-08-25 21:59 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-27 3:58 ` Yonghong Song
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=47991bc5-5f31-4cf0-a979-245e75d6bad7@linux.dev \
--to=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=clm@meta.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
/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