From: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>
To: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kafai@fb.com, eddyz87@gmail.com, songliubraving@fb.com,
yhs@fb.com, menglong8.dong@gmail.com, rostedt@kernel.org,
martin.lau@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, clm@meta.com,
ihor.solodrai@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 04/17] bpf: Add struct bpf_tramp_node object
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2026 15:34:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aZsUCATlgtjVsK_b@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <eceabbf86e0765a807e9edad56c44f0abbc218c79fa6bfb97ba480f64ef2a53b@mail.kernel.org>
On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 10:58:00AM +0000, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org wrote:
> > diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
> > --- a/include/linux/bpf.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
>
> [ ... ]
>
> > +struct bpf_tramp_node {
> > + struct bpf_link *link;
> > + struct hlist_node tramp_hlist;
> > + u64 cookie;
> > +};
>
> During the RFC review, Andrii Nakryiko suggested that instead of
> co-locating a prog/link pointer in bpf_tramp_node, the JIT functions
> like invoke_bpf_prog() could accept the prog pointer as a separate
> argument, keeping bpf_tramp_node to just {tramp_hlist, cookie}:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAEf4BzY=vqpnjrDNtLVvC3_nU5=Z7iROU_He=xbkEJDuGCoqug@mail.gmail.com/
>
> The RFC had `struct bpf_prog *prog` in bpf_tramp_node and this v1
> changed it to `struct bpf_link *link`, which still co-locates the
> path to the program inside the node. Was the refactoring to pass
> prog separately to invoke_bpf_prog() considered and ruled out, or
> is that planned for a follow-up?
yep, I ended up with different change and mentioned it in the cover letter,
I'm open to discus different solution if it's needed
jirka
>
>
> ---
> 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/22220470181
>
> AI-authorship-score: low
> AI-authorship-explanation: Mechanical refactoring with lore history dating back to 2021, consistent with the author's known kernel development style and iterative review process.
> issues-found: 1
> issue-severity-score: low
> issue-severity-explanation: Unaddressed RFC review comment from maintainer about struct design; not a code bug but a design concern about co-locating link pointer in bpf_tramp_node.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-22 14:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-20 10:06 [PATCH bpf-next 00/17] bpf: tracing_multi link Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 01/17] ftrace: Add ftrace_hash_count function Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 02/17] bpf: Use mutex lock pool for bpf trampolines Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:57 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-02-22 14:33 ` Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 19:58 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-02-22 14:34 ` Jiri Olsa
2026-02-23 19:35 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-02-24 12:27 ` Jiri Olsa
2026-02-24 17:13 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 03/17] bpf: Add struct bpf_trampoline_ops object Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 04/17] bpf: Add struct bpf_tramp_node object Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:58 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-02-22 14:34 ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2026-02-20 19:52 ` kernel test robot
2026-02-20 21:05 ` kernel test robot
2026-02-21 3:00 ` kernel test robot
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 05/17] bpf: Factor fsession link to use struct bpf_tramp_node Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 06/17] bpf: Add multi tracing attach types Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 07/17] bpf: Add bpf_trampoline_multi_attach/detach functions Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:57 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-02-22 14:34 ` Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 08/17] bpf: Add support for tracing multi link Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:57 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-02-22 14:35 ` Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 09/17] bpf: Add support for tracing_multi link cookies Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 10/17] bpf: Add support for tracing_multi link session Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:57 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-02-22 14:35 ` Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 11/17] libbpf: Add support to create tracing multi link Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:57 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-02-22 14:36 ` Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 12/17] selftests/bpf: Add tracing multi skel/pattern/ids attach tests Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 13/17] selftests/bpf: Add tracing multi intersect tests Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 14/17] selftests/bpf: Add tracing multi cookies test Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 15/17] selftests/bpf: Add tracing multi session test Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 16/17] selftests/bpf: Add tracing multi attach fails test Jiri Olsa
2026-02-20 10:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 17/17] selftests/bpf: Add tracing multi attach benchmark test Jiri Olsa
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=aZsUCATlgtjVsK_b@krava \
--to=olsajiri@gmail.com \
--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=kafai@fb.com \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=menglong8.dong@gmail.com \
--cc=rostedt@kernel.org \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
--cc=yhs@fb.com \
--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