From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org, memxor@gmail.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: sashiko-bot@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, emil@etsalapatis.com, kkd@meta.com,
kernel-team@meta.com, martin.lau@kernel.org,
yonghong.song@linux.dev, clm@meta.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 03/14] bpf: Preserve R0 lineage across helper calls
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2026 23:12:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f342767e1a33839d5074ee90971d832e21845651.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4f50ce2b6d7a797d977cd80a04a3012fc7dd0c7e57a8cf043f13fe88fee89cc2@mail.kernel.org>
On Sun, 2026-08-16 at 02:30 +0000, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > index 5d0a2d3ef594..7ef324e384f4 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > @@ -11024,13 +11024,13 @@ static int check_helper_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn
> >
> > /* reset caller saved regs */
> > bpf_diag_record_caller_saved(env, regs);
> > + bpf_diag_mod_begin(env, ®s[BPF_REG_0], NULL, BPF_DIAG_MOD_WRITE);
> > for (i = 0; i < CALLER_SAVED_REGS; i++) {
> > bpf_mark_reg_not_init(env, ®s[caller_saved[i]]);
> > check_reg_arg(env, caller_saved[i], DST_OP_NO_MARK);
> > }
> > invalidate_outgoing_stack_args(env, cur_func(env));
> >
> > - bpf_diag_mod_begin(env, ®s[BPF_REG_0], NULL, BPF_DIAG_MOD_WRITE);
> > /* update return register (already marked as written above) */
> > ret_type = fn->ret_type;
> > ret_flag = type_flag(ret_type);
>
> Does this produce the correct diagnostic message for void helpers? The
> new bpf_diag_mod_begin() is now opened unconditionally for all helpers,
> including those with RET_VOID. Because the snapshot is taken before the
> caller-saved clearing loop, a void helper now generates a history event
> with R0's real pre-call value as old and NOT_INIT as new, with reason
> BPF_DIAG_MOD_WRITE.
This is fine.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-16 6:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-16 1:57 [PATCH bpf-next v1 00/14] Follow ups for verifier errors set Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 01/14] bpf: Correct verifier diagnostic attribution for stack reads Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 6:34 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-16 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 02/14] selftests/bpf: Test verifier stack-read diagnostic attribution Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 2:45 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-16 6:35 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-16 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 03/14] bpf: Preserve R0 lineage across helper calls Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 2:30 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-16 6:12 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2026-08-16 6:36 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-16 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 04/14] bpf: Drop dead spill diagnostic condition Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 6:39 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-16 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 05/14] bpf: Use canonical stack argument names in diagnostics Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 6:40 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-16 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 06/14] bpf: Correct kfunc argument diagnostics Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 2:45 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-16 6:50 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-16 6:52 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-16 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 07/14] selftests/bpf: Test " Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 6:53 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-16 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 08/14] bpf: Report non-sleepable kfunc programs accurately Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 2:30 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-16 7:32 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-16 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 09/14] selftests/bpf: Test non-sleepable kfunc context Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 2:30 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-16 7:37 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-16 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 10/14] bpf: Correct Program Structure diagnostic context Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 2:45 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-16 7:58 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-16 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 11/14] bpf: Preserve source attribution without source text Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 8:01 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-16 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 12/14] selftests/bpf: Test Program Structure diagnostic context Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 8:06 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-16 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 13/14] bpf: Distinguish function references in policy diagnostics Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 8:09 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-16 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 14/14] selftests/bpf: Test pseudo-function " Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-16 2:45 ` bot+bpf-ci
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=f342767e1a33839d5074ee90971d832e21845651.camel@gmail.com \
--to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=clm@meta.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kkd@meta.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--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