From: Mykyta Yatsenko <mykyta.yatsenko5@gmail.com>
To: Chengkaitao <pilgrimtao@gmail.com>,
martin.lau@linux.dev, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com, song@kernel.org,
yonghong.song@linux.dev, john.fastabend@gmail.com,
kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me, haoluo@google.com,
jolsa@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org, chengkaitao@kylinos.cn,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v9 1/9] bpf: refactor kfunc checks using table-driven approach in verifier
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2026 16:20:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ikadgx7x.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260329140506.9595-2-pilgrimtao@gmail.com>
Chengkaitao <pilgrimtao@gmail.com> writes:
> From: Kaitao Cheng <chengkaitao@kylinos.cn>
>
> Replace per-kfunc btf_id chains check with btf_id_in_kfunc_table() and
> static kfunc tables for easier maintenance.
>
> Prepare for future extensions to the bpf_list API family.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kaitao Cheng <chengkaitao@kylinos.cn>
> ---
I think old is_bpf_rbtree_api_kfunc(kfunc_btf_id) is more readable than new
btf_id_in_kfunc_table(kfunc_btf_id, bpf_rbtree_api_kfuncs);
Not sure if this change should be bundled with this series, it looks
quite orthogonal.
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 261 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> 1 file changed, 144 insertions(+), 117 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index 4fbacd2149cd..f2d9863bb290 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -544,9 +544,6 @@ static bool is_async_callback_calling_kfunc(u32 btf_id);
> static bool is_callback_calling_kfunc(u32 btf_id);
> static bool is_bpf_throw_kfunc(struct bpf_insn *insn);
>
> -static bool is_bpf_wq_set_callback_kfunc(u32 btf_id);
> -static bool is_task_work_add_kfunc(u32 func_id);
> -
> static bool is_sync_callback_calling_function(enum bpf_func_id func_id)
> {
> return func_id == BPF_FUNC_for_each_map_elem ||
> @@ -586,7 +583,7 @@ static bool is_async_cb_sleepable(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn
>
> /* bpf_wq and bpf_task_work callbacks are always sleepable. */
> if (bpf_pseudo_kfunc_call(insn) && insn->off == 0 &&
> - (is_bpf_wq_set_callback_kfunc(insn->imm) || is_task_work_add_kfunc(insn->imm)))
> + is_async_callback_calling_kfunc(insn->imm))
> return true;
>
> verifier_bug(env, "unhandled async callback in is_async_cb_sleepable");
> @@ -11203,31 +11200,6 @@ static int set_task_work_schedule_callback_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
> return 0;
> }
>
> ...
> --
> 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-30 15:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-29 14:04 [PATCH bpf-next v9 0/9] bpf: Extend the bpf_list family of APIs Chengkaitao
2026-03-29 14:04 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 1/9] bpf: refactor kfunc checks using table-driven approach in verifier Chengkaitao
2026-03-30 15:20 ` Mykyta Yatsenko [this message]
2026-03-30 17:05 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-04-03 17:41 ` Chengkaitao
2026-04-04 4:49 ` Ihor Solodrai
2026-04-04 10:38 ` Chengkaitao
2026-03-29 14:04 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 2/9] bpf: refactor __bpf_list_del to take list node pointer Chengkaitao
2026-03-29 14:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 3/9] bpf: clear list node owner and unlink before drop Chengkaitao
2026-03-29 14:45 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-03-29 14:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 4/9] bpf: Introduce the bpf_list_del kfunc Chengkaitao
2026-03-29 14:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 5/9] bpf: refactor __bpf_list_add to take insertion point via **prev_ptr Chengkaitao
2026-03-29 14:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 6/9] bpf: Add bpf_list_add_impl to insert node after a given list node Chengkaitao
2026-03-29 14:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 7/9] bpf: allow bpf_list_front/back result as the prev argument of bpf_list_add_impl Chengkaitao
2026-03-29 14:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 8/9] bpf: add bpf_list_is_first/last/empty kfuncs Chengkaitao
2026-03-29 14:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 9/9] selftests/bpf: Add test cases for bpf_list_del/add/is_first/is_last/empty Chengkaitao
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=87ikadgx7x.fsf@gmail.com \
--to=mykyta.yatsenko5@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chengkaitao@kylinos.cn \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=pilgrimtao@gmail.com \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@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