Re: [PATCHv2 bpf-next 6/8] selftests/bpf: Test user memory page exec

[Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Nov 03, 2026 at 08:39:47AM +0000, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org wrote:
> > selftests/bpf: Test user memory page exec
> 
> TL;DR: Nit only: in user_mem.c selftest, the bpf_copy_to_user() ksym
> declaration names its second parameter src__srcptr, which may not match the
> kernel prototype's src and isn't a recognised verifier suffix.
> 
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/user_mem.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/user_mem.c
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/user_mem.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/user_mem.c
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> > @@ -10,10 +10,13 @@ char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
> >  
> >  extern unsigned long bpf_user_anon_mmap(unsigned long len, unsigned long prot) __ksym;
> >  extern int bpf_user_munmap(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len) __ksym;
> > +extern int bpf_copy_to_user(void *unsafe_ptr__ign, const void *src__srcptr,
> > +			    u32 src__sz, u64 flags) __ksym;
> 
> This isn't a bug, but should the second parameter be named src, as in the
> kernel prototype of bpf_copy_to_user()?
> 
> The __srcptr suffix looks like a verifier annotation, but the verifier does
> not recognise it, and it sits between unsafe_ptr__ign and src__sz, which are
> real suffixes.

yep, leftover from previous change, will remove

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/41602296728