From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793792577; b=d+SFsoB3guHgNxfUhJILpashx2sN7sxyyCauS2XCUJYEqF69cDJUSVkXhVNXuiTkmgHv QKhe5gXEKZraEzAIIj9tI/Mswhm570wePNRoJCLI3HEu14N4doCAEHGUtx3mm2y2Gx9u0 0+dE7cKcRa2sSjpM0w+akFXEZG2912F8Ll1rlSlVfCb2qLTsoZr3Vy2L2BZNluTxtADOJ 7/93OxLRApLd0WuV1ald+7zXyTa2GlTonH6ESlui/s+0DjpKRMEBu6y2F5O4wByg1FxUA BqpR3O+uGnEyEco+CKBybcl/eo3JIk2pFV9wnIkPXq1Ri/uReNrn6tpjdY64IDVkZqg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793792577; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Date; bh=W+D7wI9NSxYwB7FLUJeElN3wPz2OZ57FW2nIA3DB6qs=; b=kEY+vw27PP+X81qS2r2rW20MP62amohRcf8ArdGTBa5ccthxUtrizMOQkb/nya+epmaf Gn1dKKcTufUujU3FXuGtviQYRz4KfffjcviguFB2IlffyqqQuLzXikY+IrGORzSJfMxYV 6kartIade88rmmmuOxwMBbief4itXhOyhFYVus17yDVqNNvG2EvwD57gWtdI/ZC4th+Nc go6zvJHax1dh1DB2pDvDqhrtGad7cj8Y9GiXtjxFC6QTJBjCOLslEsEAo4Y8KDwGw6ff+ e69+fsx/2reR8AQm4gMwx1VerECuUXjEiDfz11AELklQ9DGHdnBzdH09j0Ck4BQktSw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=BY0Pd2uf; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A758606A326 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2026 11:42:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=BY0Pd2uf Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8CF6B1F00A16; Wed, 4 Nov 2026 11:42:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1793792576; bh=W+D7wI9NSxYwB7FLUJeElN3wPz2OZ57FW2nIA3DB6qs=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=BY0Pd2uff+kccmHyIlXjwaFl78SzeKGLHCG0mRAmm6O/a7Ch0rdb4rWqt+YwKaWVP qyxlZHOmHFlep0LSG+U4jmm0gvH0FV8pMTSUFng6o4hFLG/BJCy1EEPEK7R+/qy80E jEaWDG0ZJWffNFCbLkR8mhl0Qzq47sNd5Y2/KGWiSkHKdNIESdv16Z/iBfre+utSrj NsSg76t0KT20XyjA0Ij98y8FGqNZicMvHaSsqoLDewSD0KdAGTuci+lSYLw34Ul/Eg J5cb7pBaQKPqq1Ob3+ylowoyVgAlREpBvHjYE7lR5Zn3+UggKaxVCXmw+ePFeFfS1P skQIOMuFufyjQ== Message-ID: From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Test local storage max value size Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Jonathan Bastari Thamrin" Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20261104-local-storage-max-v1-2-c836731bd184@gmail.com> References: <20261104-local-storage-max-v1-0-c836731bd184@gmail.com> <20261104-local-storage-max-v1-2-c836731bd184@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2026 11:42:56 +0000 X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Low] selftests/bpf: non-standard multi-line comment above find_max_value= _size() -- commit 1da8998ccd74b6171959f2da642b888d3db302bd Author: Jonathan Bastari Thamrin selftests/bpf: Test local storage max value size This commit adds a selftest in task_local_storage.c that uses binary search to find the largest value size accepted for a task storage map, verifies the size is at least 4096 bytes, and checks that an element of that size can be stored. > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_local_storage.c = b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_local_storage.c > index 5b2b56cc3a4f3..c7e9fa6743b93 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_local_storage.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_local_storage.c > @@ -495,6 +495,91 @@ static void test_uptr_map_failure(const char *map_na= me, int expected_errno) [ ... ] > +/* Return the largest value_size the kernel accepts for a local storage > + * map, or -1 on an unexpected error. > + */ > +static int find_max_value_size(void) [Severity: Low] This isn't a bug, but in BPF selftests, should the multi-line comment above find_max_value_size() in tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_local_= storage.c place the opening /* on its own line with the comment text starting on the next line? --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261104-local-stor= age-max-v1-0-c836731bd184@gmail.com?part=3D2