From: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@fb.com>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: Warn with new bpf_unreachable() kfunc maybe due to uninitialized var
Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 11:13:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b32cd638-5ba1-4af5-80e6-3103786a7c8e@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAADnVQJurPs_e3Lx9O7qZ+=HPk7XarXoGXeTiARbw8bW+-txGA@mail.gmail.com>
On 5/16/25 5:31 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 2:17 PM Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev> wrote:
>>
>> So I then decided to add an 'exit' insn after bpf_unreachable() in llvm.
>> See latest https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131731 (commit #2).
>> So we won't have any control flow issues in code. With newer llvm change,
> That's a good idea. Certainly better than special case this 'noreturn'
> semantic in the verifier.
Current latest llvm21 will cause kernel build failure:
https://patchew.org/linux/20250506-default-const-init-clang-v2-1-fcfb69703264@kernel.org/
I will wait for the fix in bpf-next and then submit v3.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-17 18:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-15 20:06 [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: Warn with new bpf_unreachable() kfunc maybe due to uninitialized var Yonghong Song
2025-05-15 20:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add a test with bpf_unreachable() kfunc Yonghong Song
2025-05-17 8:45 ` kernel test robot
2025-05-15 22:42 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: Warn with new bpf_unreachable() kfunc maybe due to uninitialized var Alexei Starovoitov
2025-05-16 21:17 ` Yonghong Song
2025-05-16 21:31 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-05-17 18:13 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2025-05-18 15:41 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-05-19 0:09 ` 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=b32cd638-5ba1-4af5-80e6-3103786a7c8e@linux.dev \
--to=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).