From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-172.mta1.migadu.com (out-172.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.172]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB3A73CEB8D for ; Mon, 13 Apr 2026 14:27:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776090466; cv=none; b=bwC5Jt0dq8It/di1aN7JHFgHNqSha1oqCfzvTrsJXghDc4ZUrbYC0u4sRLqQutao4y9TGqyDGbwmP0GQHcOJhh+QZiyUcDidmtt8PZtEjvVnswd6UdjuHgWQ71sRvt2hJHix8GXQ6D3tVuBTn9Sf01LCe6fWLcyA0dpbWI3Hp0w= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776090466; c=relaxed/simple; bh=s1eLIhaTJqfaDV+w4RtVPu7koBsSM/jB9ejz7RfaXX8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=QkGQ9H+o+mMg1OFgPb2ryw9RgMTvzUL0bEV9ejj3NJwf6+XH2AsK2cdP6GoodMTkhBhuGqjIAFRoLKuXJR90AmzLXyx4ZcSir0qJgseXW+vTOnISmqDL01CJ3IV0S6/oscxh7g+7kUs1WP3jnvO/VTtYBe8EcGasqK3Pxss0ESU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=oy3J0Z9i; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="oy3J0Z9i" Message-ID: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1776090462; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=PUOQbSrZ6DKvUJDOk/Jo8LQHcVnQZxjKh6Xf2t/ykMk=; b=oy3J0Z9iXiUjMUSblm86DIz3CAc75BBdJWQbxyO7wqHc/MhYOc3gczGM9Y5VTG3PBSLNto poQUe5ujehnmTzwx1KjhUgC2LCcL4tAlxbubyRUOUhrcHphEjF+XyV90dCxfE3pL4GBA5S FIma63Vz9sHVgu+hjvd9VnEgADYL/gE= Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2026 07:27:23 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 04/18] bpf: Refactor to handle memory and size together Content-Language: en-GB To: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org Cc: ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, jose.marchesi@oracle.com, kernel-team@fb.com, martin.lau@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com, clm@meta.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev References: <20260412045847.255351-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev> <834331bd3a4dd3bc2a3b365ae9dcf8031f22041d33623c1712432f5083f15c9a@mail.kernel.org> X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Yonghong Song In-Reply-To: <834331bd3a4dd3bc2a3b365ae9dcf8031f22041d33623c1712432f5083f15c9a@mail.kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On 4/11/26 10:31 PM, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org wrote: >> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c >> index 4c67a15c73e1..cddd39ebb40b 100644 >> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c >> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c > [ ... ] > >> @@ -8591,11 +8591,13 @@ static int check_helper_mem_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno, >> * containing the pointer. >> */ >> static int check_mem_size_reg(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, >> - struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u32 regno, >> + struct bpf_reg_state *mem_reg, >> + struct bpf_reg_state *size_reg, u32 mem_regno, > The function comment above still says "@regno is the register > containing the access size. regno-1 is the register containing > the pointer." > > After this refactor there is no @regno parameter. The parameter is > now mem_regno, which is the memory (pointer) register, not the size > register. Should the comment be updated to match the new signature? > Something like "@mem_regno is the register containing the pointer, > size register is at mem_regno+1" would match the actual interface. Ack. Comments need update as well. > > > --- > 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/24299298635