Linux Documentation
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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


  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