From: Paul Chaignon <paul.chaignon@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Harishankar Vishwanathan <harishankar.vishwanathan@gmail.com>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
Helen Koike <koike@igalia.com>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
Subject: [PATCH RFC bpf-next 0/7] bpf: Fix reg_bounds' slow mode and improve verifier refinement
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2026 15:09:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cover.1776344897.git.paul.chaignon@gmail.com> (raw)
This patchset fixes several failing test cases in the slow-mode
reg_bounds selftests. It also includes an improvement to the verifier
u32->*64 refinement logic, to help better align it with reg_bounds'
refinement logic.
I'm sending as an RFC because it needs [1] to be merged first. The two
patches from [1] are included here, before my fixes.
Patch "bpf: Improve 64bits bounds refinement from u32 bounds" also
happens to address the refinement shortcomings discussed at [2]. To
demonstrate that, I included the new selftests from [2] at the end of
this series.
1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260415160728.657270-1-harishankar.vishwanathan@gmail.com/
2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260410124035.297632-1-koike@igalia.com/
Harishankar Vishwanathan (1):
bpf/verifier: Use intersection checks when simulating to detect dead
branches
Paul Chaignon (5):
selftests/bpf: Test for empty intersection of tnum and u64
selftests/bpf: Fix reg_bounds to prune on range violations
bpf: Improve 64bits bounds refinement from u32 bounds
bpf: Remove dead code from u32->*64 refinement logic
selftests/bpf: Hardcode insteresting 32->64 refinement cases
Eduard Zingerman (1):
selftests/bpf: new cases handled by 32->64 range refinements
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 299 +++++++++++++++---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c | 38 ++-
.../selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bounds.c | 202 ++++++++++++
3 files changed, 482 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-)
--
2.43.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-04-16 13:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-16 13:09 Paul Chaignon [this message]
2026-04-16 13:11 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 1/7] bpf/verifier: Use intersection checks when simulating to detect dead branches Paul Chaignon
2026-04-16 14:03 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-16 18:39 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-16 13:12 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 2/7] selftests/bpf: Test for empty intersection of tnum and u64 Paul Chaignon
2026-04-16 14:03 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-16 18:53 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-16 13:12 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 3/7] selftests/bpf: Fix reg_bounds to prune on range violations Paul Chaignon
2026-04-16 19:08 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-16 13:12 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 4/7] bpf: Improve 64bits bounds refinement from u32 bounds Paul Chaignon
2026-04-16 19:33 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-16 13:12 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 5/7] bpf: Remove dead code from u32->*64 refinement logic Paul Chaignon
2026-04-16 13:13 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 6/7] selftests/bpf: Hardcode insteresting 32->64 refinement cases Paul Chaignon
2026-04-16 13:13 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 7/7] selftests/bpf: new cases handled by 32->64 range refinements Paul Chaignon
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=cover.1776344897.git.paul.chaignon@gmail.com \
--to=paul.chaignon@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=harishankar.vishwanathan@gmail.com \
--cc=koike@igalia.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