Re: [PATCH bpf-next v11 19/26] libbpf: Add cleanup_info to bpf_prog_load_opts

[Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>]

On 10/14/26 9:13 PM, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [Low] bpf: multi-line comment style violation in bpf_prog_load_opts
> --
>
> commit 7622c492adc459370a78a700a25047031969a083
> Author: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
>
> libbpf: Add cleanup_info to bpf_prog_load_opts
>
> This commit expands bpf_prog_load_opts to include an exception cleanup
> table. It adds cleanup_info_cnt, cleanup_info, and cleanup_info_rec_size
> fields, which are then passed to the kernel via bpf_prog_load.
>
> [ ... ]
>
>> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h
>> index 826d9cc9ab65d..64699e0e4e1a8 100644
>> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h
>> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h
>> @@ -128,9 +128,17 @@ struct bpf_prog_load_opts {
>>   
>>   	/* if set, provides the length of fd_array */
>>   	__u32 fd_array_cnt;
>> +
>> +	/* exception cleanup table: cleanup_info_cnt records of
>> +	 * cleanup_info_rec_size bytes each (struct bpf_cleanup_info),
>> +	 * holding instruction indices into insns
>> +	 */
> [Severity: Low]
> This isn't a bug, but does this multi-line comment follow the preferred
> BPF subsystem style? The subsystem guidelines strictly require that the
> opening /* for multi-line comments be placed on its own line.
>
> Could this be formatted as follows to match the standard?
>
> /*
>   * exception cleanup table: cleanup_info_cnt records of
>   * cleanup_info_rec_size bytes each (struct bpf_cleanup_info),
>   * holding instruction indices into insns
>   */

This is a format issue. Can be a follow up or as is.

>
>> +	__u32 cleanup_info_cnt;
>> +	const void *cleanup_info;
>> +	__u32 cleanup_info_rec_size;
>>   	size_t :0;
>>   };