From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f46.google.com (mail-wm1-f46.google.com [209.85.128.46]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44D8925A359 for ; Sun, 22 Feb 2026 14:34:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.46 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771770893; cv=none; b=DX7FX+NOQhtk7WNJ7peRu5p13ZstAt5W28D6j25LJ/GtE90/FzXrZa6BvPnFJhzuuauhcFIHdxbhd4ku7Jy+KgQIVK9Dqkt+67mNd59gOGQgF8zML0ZJd/IS7WX9FbUGv7CbJ5463Z9yETnEUQLzEbv79d84U/GXpJA4OT9loPM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771770893; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+bH73aJ3MyPjFrvzIB/+/ugrO+546xKFstMAtYnTweU=; h=From:Date:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=FsaoT3E8HOTdvSArhAOvdkh1QkKyi87/lQ6USteTUdTcFiswumTVbkTvvAlrK1cDTrv+IH8aTJnzDxZ/bIEit7QBHhKC2OiUzH45osogoDX5oTeZ9PGhH1I2RQUAmVEjJMqgXKaX/as7iJYJRZGiix+4hUWQQHE54hUXrcQUAvM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=IqLArUfJ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.46 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="IqLArUfJ" Received: by mail-wm1-f46.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-48375f10628so21525435e9.1 for ; Sun, 22 Feb 2026 06:34:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1771770891; x=1772375691; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:date:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=fTMNTS1qQhHkRpmgMXkfEEo8IFcYCASTF6Iye1Ocd30=; b=IqLArUfJAurOarVcd7KB2D/oLLuDZXurwsTwO8+vFAAhEV65XLFCMXgwr/KHMlQjj8 WYzdw6bb2OGkRH64jgX6yLP6c00NNNhwXuaMOoW8J8KDXJZWhTWPl7mArUzvriZGU6xI kKLAaU+HIP2vSEvcBg01wVdXPXOkh47QRas+916jfbo5ei6XgisIL8rIndbLB4uRUuel HSzP4qZGRih7e01J6pMem1pd4AcZZDBH0t1QO9WFFmyKOF0I5HhcvMDlBZ5Iy3jCdQYY uT6v8ml70WZMoUdae2REePRUfDZvdyDH9xTg1Q1GIE7rhpY9rcMeL5yigxy6K7jLRc3r 6/wQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1771770891; x=1772375691; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:date:from:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=fTMNTS1qQhHkRpmgMXkfEEo8IFcYCASTF6Iye1Ocd30=; b=f4NgBndwLf4Am17pWC9ozS6sAsTn3NpoHKRWlVWuh1aaCOrzmuFXsBAolEqY7yMUdh 4HHUVTIeyCt16dpb/vNTw3FWsQEG23ELbgXs7JoxvLPlPi02UM7KahUAU2bExFK072kL cby2Wk1CUPy/2s+YRLEXn5rWJpRXY3H44CA2JfWlEP3QB2b77lbSNXz6GFfrldIuNYFD JjiEn850DVI02LZzCLokS/3PlegKuD1YLy1JhBkWkvpj37nSSKIAKhnctMBKtRcGH2ta DU9RUk+rR1ZSGO32t8cxMHLq2MWfHvqCj7Pa8QCVJ1l/QAdSec5TR87bnVYMKi4/gXHm 828A== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWc5Z+U/WUM3cSk3sy1IgNo+cCQ11zC+r8cYizD+46o2+LjbZ6WSZGWhN345IRS3u7Pl/wteLsiGh+gQh6MN5iPsfc=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwgATHJGdjmSR8SP8Kb51LsFURL3hglSto8w2li3y8vWHXdGtYS MZfCbXEpuNZNjEjo44vxuD4bl7EZ7MbTcegQdGk7ApdxuG1+S84X5dJV X-Gm-Gg: AZuq6aIjv4XyStyzgLkls+FXeRS6F5yYU8tiJf2BFe1R0uDfagwrCh5Q7eZpnBuWSks rJSFRle8NN0j91ATGAY3Ym4HxFoF5Oeoj/0KEUsI57BLRkht8dLaNvFGlTQqoJr4TO+Ib0rF3WB /aJZFNHunamrqOa/KqQRC/2YT7xwLtm+2BBdNqwEfSZoyTFbohQZkhhMOw7oa3YsHhuwQPpRYEI XTw6yQ/8anW/Y9jV0kiyzSkIIPpJog3WEiFf6X/LvAIPihWJ2AXWNPxRMRkZF9pnPQ6MMVeermQ wiTEKxZKKxDQ4jLkQ2uf8LfEeZNOIQ4Hy+wdUBLGWB3Fp8x8X4ch33BjCsvYI2vBrUCXjw8lo9N gYGhTWSvvBMNlC+QSXMEVKivC0xjwmT6VQiWUfRtioWjFqL5x4KUN1QzubBqIUiKVEPIrBXA/ X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3f14:b0:483:703e:4ad5 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-483a95e2563mr81396575e9.22.1771770890606; Sun, 22 Feb 2026 06:34:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from krava ([2a02:8308:a00c:e200::b44f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-43970bf9feasm12473187f8f.6.2026.02.22.06.34.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 22 Feb 2026 06:34:50 -0800 (PST) From: Jiri Olsa X-Google-Original-From: Jiri Olsa Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2026 15:34:48 +0100 To: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kafai@fb.com, eddyz87@gmail.com, songliubraving@fb.com, yhs@fb.com, menglong8.dong@gmail.com, rostedt@kernel.org, martin.lau@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, clm@meta.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 04/17] bpf: Add struct bpf_tramp_node object Message-ID: References: <20260220100649.628307-5-jolsa@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@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: On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 10:58:00AM +0000, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org wrote: > > diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h > > --- a/include/linux/bpf.h > > +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h > > [ ... ] > > > +struct bpf_tramp_node { > > + struct bpf_link *link; > > + struct hlist_node tramp_hlist; > > + u64 cookie; > > +}; > > During the RFC review, Andrii Nakryiko suggested that instead of > co-locating a prog/link pointer in bpf_tramp_node, the JIT functions > like invoke_bpf_prog() could accept the prog pointer as a separate > argument, keeping bpf_tramp_node to just {tramp_hlist, cookie}: > > https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAEf4BzY=vqpnjrDNtLVvC3_nU5=Z7iROU_He=xbkEJDuGCoqug@mail.gmail.com/ > > The RFC had `struct bpf_prog *prog` in bpf_tramp_node and this v1 > changed it to `struct bpf_link *link`, which still co-locates the > path to the program inside the node. Was the refactoring to pass > prog separately to invoke_bpf_prog() considered and ruled out, or > is that planned for a follow-up? yep, I ended up with different change and mentioned it in the cover letter, I'm open to discus different solution if it's needed jirka > > > --- > 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/22220470181 > > AI-authorship-score: low > AI-authorship-explanation: Mechanical refactoring with lore history dating back to 2021, consistent with the author's known kernel development style and iterative review process. > issues-found: 1 > issue-severity-score: low > issue-severity-explanation: Unaddressed RFC review comment from maintainer about struct design; not a code bug but a design concern about co-locating link pointer in bpf_tramp_node.