From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 6A807364E9F; Thu, 18 Dec 2025 16:09:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1766074184; cv=none; b=iWYliqpX3aATxBkUatnTFaxVyr2tRfWsmDzt854vAT6HtVYczVxHtdfdvgMMgviSC94H2+/1TOhGtr7AqRN77CK40Gf+lVDB7qSa++1gLpoEVJ7QGe4zQCu6DUBOCp+wfYk+fXReQF1nCn4lYjHF9SH3Yrdx+tIXyJolw1vaOEE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1766074184; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OaX0M6d+7wMRlYS/BEZvp7zxg3HdWlfzOwJQjdKkB0I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=rpiUCN1VHRhn7G2UVw3O8Ntxc6KWtE4swoF/m1jew0T4MBMD1AUfdugMD+uPhFqjBzTuqhcFRyTa+5wEumKetF20ISkuO9dk2WDSjwe9ea89LDBrzmpBA6sfTTq8EIUfqW//KfZ959gy0LcnKbho7NGXan5hLEdQP20DnJfDKxM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=UfaA/7lv; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="UfaA/7lv" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BDCD6C4CEFB; Thu, 18 Dec 2025 16:09:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1766074183; bh=OaX0M6d+7wMRlYS/BEZvp7zxg3HdWlfzOwJQjdKkB0I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=UfaA/7lvQ4zwujLRnNiSihgZPv9+hb3oQujvQCQ7MbSfuq5VjHVuk92ousa78YHGq IlVft4liH03uKYNTHhHiOxm+p/nB322TQCTuXPAA2JdfNdZPMykmvui88q2njJybTU CdaWDv1JSzE3eY+q0KCN3bknpZRv3ZWa6ivoOJvOWGDb8CGrO/GCUxS4NY+bcqxQNG 8UVzCrD759+mFttAVLQh+I/S9/wXlHu+XW9KMbQm0J0ZRDKKdog3xp2AvS7tJPzszC CMx36v8HjnDa0xBvWhaAUXL1khoSmQ6D/nzh/ddVaC2GxolhagP4dF2LjwQpZCpTyR SzxBTTNW3laOg== Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2025 06:09:42 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Chen Ridong Cc: Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Koutn=FD?= , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" , Johannes Weiner , Kees Cook , "Gustavo A. R. Silva" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] cgroup: Use __counted_by for cgroup::ancestors Message-ID: References: <20251217162744.352391-1-mkoutny@suse.com> <20251217162744.352391-4-mkoutny@suse.com> <87cc0370-1924-4d33-bbf1-7fc2b03149e3@huaweicloud.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87cc0370-1924-4d33-bbf1-7fc2b03149e3@huaweicloud.com> On Thu, Dec 18, 2025 at 03:09:32PM +0800, Chen Ridong wrote: > Note that this level may already be used in existing BPF programs (e.g., > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_ls_uptr.c). Do we need to consider compatibility here? That's a good point. Is __counted_by instrumentation tied to some compiler flag? If so, might as well make it an optional extra field specifically for the annotation rather than changing the meaning of an existing field. Thanks. -- tejun