From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-172.mta1.migadu.com (out-172.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.172]) (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 BD94B13959D for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2024 07:12:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724397136; cv=none; b=bDYyTlbPF/VXIv2L1SLlLY5Bjj21xGiVOFwkCUpi5eufjdHfoMHFPcB5MOtQbOAS+n2rJoB8R9ehnOne59T7aEu+sOXHtaV3KQklDTRMgImFEaRCLSBME06MAg7se39gVUT349AEnMRSwyVfKen5hUzRpvOtNSVb/J3/A4mDd5U= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724397136; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QjcH1BEuWHmNibEMoZBPcc66J96gyQ7uYowHOvFzxO4=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=OGY3/DsLE8la+ZpMN/2qv553SgjyN9wJzgUGwMtu+XNyCfleoAxJOTklmtT+pWsOqRMuedSKunkQKXda5A80BEvvPNzBO1Xw3xSzqgpEutGGG3+EADZCFprqf9PA9wXvMTzcO0edT1lnCFCwbjGkjjEsaJ+SvFjAysnDMhjmsjM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=icCA3zmo; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="icCA3zmo" Message-ID: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1724397132; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=a6n0wnoPAcJF/7kS5yMq3pmT0HLmPp3tJepFRPvQRNc=; b=icCA3zmoXUMtT3rgGRychKf9R9fXaktHv8p6kd+QscAiQZaezEF9LHbn5fnhxJFbrC4tOM QCYjV/O93mu8Fvq0GGb01ThJ9W8AkBzt+UT1HysrbgAvJRWs/3WEAcRp6SCbB6sCjrT44a OMG5ZQ3m2kiISEwhY6U1CFZNdIUSlSc= Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 15:12:06 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/bpf: Fix incorrect parameters in NULL pointer checking To: Dan Carpenter , Alexei Starovoitov Cc: Yonghong Song , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , Martin KaFai Lau , Eddy Z , Song Liu , John Fastabend , KP Singh , Stanislav Fomichev , Hao Luo , Jiri Olsa , Mykola Lysenko , Shuah Khan , bpf , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , LKML , Hao Ge References: <20240820023447.29002-1-hao.ge@linux.dev> <02dd26b5-16a0-4732-80e4-c7bf183e965a@linux.dev> <58f57d70-a787-4012-8763-cc6eb642ef8a@stanley.mountain> X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Hao Ge In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Hi Dan and Alexei I apologize for any inconvenience my mistake may have caused to both of you. On 8/22/24 06:31, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 03:07:27PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 2:50 PM Dan Carpenter wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 02:03:17PM -0700, Yonghong Song wrote: >>>> On 8/19/24 7:34 PM, Hao Ge wrote: >>>>> From: Hao Ge >>>>> >>>>> Smatch reported the following warning: >>>>> ./tools/testing/selftests/bpf/testing_helpers.c:455 get_xlated_program() >>>>> warn: variable dereferenced before check 'buf' (see line 454) >>>>> >>>>> It seems correct,so let's modify it based on it's suggestion. >>>>> >>>>> Actually,commit b23ed4d74c4d ("selftests/bpf: Fix invalid pointer >>>>> check in get_xlated_program()") fixed an issue in the test_verifier.c >>>>> once,but it was reverted this time. >>>>> >>>>> Let's solve this issue with the minimal changes possible. >>>>> >>>>> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter >>>>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/1eb3732f-605a-479d-ba64-cd14250cbf91@stanley.mountain/ >>>>> Fixes: b4b7a4099b8c ("selftests/bpf: Factor out get_xlated_program() helper") >>>>> Signed-off-by: Hao Ge >>>> In the future, please change subject '[PATCH] ...' to '[PATCH bpf-next] ...' >>>> so CI can properly test it. >>> It feels like there should be a technical solution to this. The CI system is >>> something on AWS and it's too expensive to just check every patch that's sent to >>> the bpf list? My understanding is that there are only two bpf trees. >>> >>> if [ "$FIXES_HASH" == "" ] ; then >>> TREE=next >>> elif git merge-base --is-ancestor $FIXES_HASH origin/master ; then >>> TREE=linus >>> else >>> TREE=next >>> fi >>> >>> These days the zero day bot people are checking around a thousand git trees. >>> They pull emails off the various lists and apply them to the right places. It's >>> a doable thing. >> Dan, >> >> Various people pointed out that you need to use the proper subject in >> the patches. >> You clearly knew that rule and yet you ignored it, >> and worse still you keep coming up with these excuses. >> Don't be surprised that people who are supposed to review your patches >> will take a long time to reply or "forget" about them as you "forget" >> about patch submission rules. Perhaps it was referring to me? Regardless, I will reflect on myself and make improvements. > You're emailing the wrong person. This isn't my patch. I don't send BPF > patches. > > regards, > dan carpenter