BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org,  daniel@iogearbox.net,
	martin.lau@kernel.org
Cc: kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf 5/5] libbpf: warn on unexpected __arg_ctx type when rewriting BTF
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:50:44 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e4a6106a0b4247cbf83c2311e60f69b10ef1517b.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240117223340.1733595-6-andrii@kernel.org>

On Wed, 2024-01-17 at 14:33 -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
[...]

> +	/* special cases */
> +	switch (prog->type) {
> +	case BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE:
> +	case BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT:
> +		/* `struct pt_regs *` is expected, but we need to fix up */
> +		if (btf_is_struct(t) && strcmp(tname, "pt_regs") == 0)
> +			return true;
> +		break;

Just to double-check my understanding, in patch #3 you say:

> for perf_event kernel allows `struct {pt_regs,user_pt_regs,user_regs_struct} *`.

Here `true` is returned only for `pt_regs`,
meaning that arch specific types "user_pt_regs" and "user_regs_struct"
would not be converted to "bpf_perf_event_data" but "pt_regs" would, right?

[...]



  reply	other threads:[~2024-01-18 19:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-01-17 22:33 [PATCH v2 bpf 0/5] Tighten up arg:ctx type enforcement Andrii Nakryiko
2024-01-17 22:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf 1/5] libbpf: feature-detect arg:ctx tag support in kernel Andrii Nakryiko
2024-01-18 19:50   ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-01-19  0:43     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-01-19  0:46       ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-01-17 22:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf 2/5] bpf: extract bpf_ctx_convert_map logic and make it more reusable Andrii Nakryiko
2024-01-17 22:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf 3/5] bpf: enforce types for __arg_ctx-tagged arguments in global subprogs Andrii Nakryiko
2024-01-18 19:50   ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-01-19  0:50     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-01-17 22:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf 4/5] selftests/bpf: add tests confirming type logic in kernel for __arg_ctx Andrii Nakryiko
2024-01-17 22:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf 5/5] libbpf: warn on unexpected __arg_ctx type when rewriting BTF Andrii Nakryiko
2024-01-18 19:50   ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2024-01-19  0:53     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-01-19  1:00       ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-01-18 19:49 ` [PATCH v2 bpf 0/5] Tighten up arg:ctx type enforcement Eduard Zingerman
2024-01-18 19:53   ` Eduard Zingerman

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=e4a6106a0b4247cbf83c2311e60f69b10ef1517b.camel@gmail.com \
    --to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.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