From: Kaitao Cheng <kaitao.cheng@linux.dev>
To: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net,
martin.lau@linux.dev, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org,
eddyz87@gmail.com, song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev,
john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me,
haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org,
chengkaitao@kylinos.cn, skhan@linuxfoundation.org,
memxor@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, vmalik@redhat.com,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, martin.lau@kernel.org,
clm@meta.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND bpf-next v10 1/8] bpf: refactor __bpf_list_del to take list node pointer
Date: Tue, 12 May 2026 16:55:59 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4e1d29b5-38d5-4419-9f2b-1b421486ab46@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6eb07d559a41965a3a9b186b4c28c0942cf1bfb982d539b92c76c27b08db0b04@mail.kernel.org>
I have clarified this issue in the [PATCH bpf-next v10 1/8] patch,
with the link provided below:
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/e908cd1a-a0ee-49b1-8528-c455bbd4c432@linux.dev/
在 2026/5/12 14:41, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org 写道:
>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
>> index baa12b24bb64..9cd7b028592c 100644
>> --- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
>> @@ -2550,22 +2550,24 @@ __bpf_kfunc int bpf_list_push_back_impl(struct bpf_list_head *head,
>> return bpf_list_push_back(head, node, meta__ign, off);
>> }
>>
>> -static struct bpf_list_node *__bpf_list_del(struct bpf_list_head *head, bool tail)
>> +static struct bpf_list_node *__bpf_list_del(struct bpf_list_head *head,
>> + struct list_head *n)
>> {
>> - struct list_head *n, *h = (void *)head;
>> + struct list_head *h = (void *)head;
>> struct bpf_list_node_kern *node;
>>
>> /* If list_head was 0-initialized by map, bpf_obj_init_field wasn't
>> * called on its fields, so init here
>> */
>> - if (unlikely(!h->next))
>> + if (unlikely(!h->next)) {
>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(h);
>> + return NULL;
>> + }
>> if (list_empty(h))
>> return NULL;
>>
>> - n = tail ? h->prev : h->next;
>> node = container_of(n, struct bpf_list_node_kern, list_head);
>> - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(READ_ONCE(node->owner) != head))
>> + if (unlikely(READ_ONCE(node->owner) != head))
>> return NULL;
>>
>> list_del_init(n);
>> @@ -2575,12 +2577,16 @@ static struct bpf_list_node *__bpf_list_del(struct bpf_list_head *head, bool tai
>>
>> __bpf_kfunc struct bpf_list_node *bpf_list_pop_front(struct bpf_list_head *head)
>> {
>> - return __bpf_list_del(head, false);
>> + struct list_head *h = (void *)head;
>> +
>> + return __bpf_list_del(head, h->next);
>> }
>
> The new code reads h->next before __bpf_list_del checks if the list is
> initialized. If the list is uninitialized (h->next is NULL), a NULL pointer
> is passed to __bpf_list_del.
>
> While __bpf_list_del eventually initializes the list and returns NULL without
> dereferencing the NULL pointer, this is counterintuitive - passing a
> potentially garbage value that is later ignored.
>
> Can you move the initialization check into the top-level kfuncs
> (bpf_list_pop_front and bpf_list_pop_back) to ensure the list_head passed to
> __bpf_list_del is always valid? You could initialize the list and return NULL
> in that case - we know it's empty.
>
> This concern was raised by Emil Tsalapatis in v8:
> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/DH6W7K2SLPYB.PCO7FQ6CR1YZ@etsalapatis.com/
>
>>
>> __bpf_kfunc struct bpf_list_node *bpf_list_pop_back(struct bpf_list_head *head)
>> {
>> - return __bpf_list_del(head, true);
>> + struct list_head *h = (void *)head;
>> +
>> + return __bpf_list_del(head, h->prev);
>> }
>
>
> ---
> 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/25716874656
--
Thanks
Kaitao Cheng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-12 8:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-12 5:59 [PATCH RESEND bpf-next v10 0/8] bpf: Extend the bpf_list family of APIs Kaitao cheng
2026-05-12 5:59 ` [PATCH RESEND bpf-next v10 1/8] bpf: refactor __bpf_list_del to take list node pointer Kaitao cheng
2026-05-12 6:41 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-05-12 8:55 ` Kaitao Cheng [this message]
2026-05-12 5:59 ` [PATCH RESEND bpf-next v10 2/8] bpf: clear list node owner and unlink before drop Kaitao cheng
2026-05-12 6:41 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-05-12 5:59 ` [PATCH RESEND bpf-next v10 3/8] bpf: Introduce the bpf_list_del kfunc Kaitao cheng
2026-05-12 6:41 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-05-12 9:36 ` Kaitao Cheng
2026-05-12 5:59 ` [PATCH RESEND bpf-next v10 4/8] bpf: refactor __bpf_list_add to take insertion point via **prev_ptr Kaitao cheng
2026-05-12 5:59 ` [PATCH RESEND bpf-next v10 5/8] bpf: Add bpf_list_add to insert node after a given list node Kaitao cheng
2026-05-12 6:41 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-05-12 12:05 ` Kaitao Cheng
2026-05-12 5:59 ` [PATCH RESEND bpf-next v10 6/8] bpf: add bpf_list_is_first/last/empty kfuncs Kaitao cheng
2026-05-12 5:59 ` [PATCH RESEND bpf-next v10 7/8] bpf: allow non-owning list-node args via __nonown_allowed Kaitao cheng
2026-05-12 6:41 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-05-12 5:59 ` [PATCH RESEND bpf-next v10 8/8] selftests/bpf: Add test cases for bpf_list_del/add/is_first/is_last/empty Kaitao cheng
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=4e1d29b5-38d5-4419-9f2b-1b421486ab46@linux.dev \
--to=kaitao.cheng@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chengkaitao@kylinos.cn \
--cc=clm@meta.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=vmalik@redhat.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