From: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
To: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>,
Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@cloudflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] bpf: Remove kfunc support in prologue and epilogue
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 10:54:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h5sfthoj.fsf@cloudflare.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8eb725d8d0878a7a1b582fdfacf05d20a2542304.camel@gmail.com> (Eduard Zingerman's message of "Mon, 19 Jan 2026 14:55:29 -0800")
On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 02:55 PM -08, Eduard Zingerman wrote:
> I think that patches #3 and #4 have to be swapped, otherwise there is
> a selftest failure when only patches #1-3 are applied:
>
> #281/17 pro_epilogue/syscall_pro_epilogue:FAIL
>
> If we want to keep selftests passing for arbitrary bisects.
I don't have an opinion. I assumed it'd get applied as a batch without
fast forward, so bisect would be going over merge commits.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-21 9:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-19 19:53 [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] Switch from kfuncs to direct helper calls in prologue/epilogue Jakub Sitnicki
2026-01-19 19:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/4] bpf, verifier: Support direct helper calls from prologue/epilogue Jakub Sitnicki
2026-01-19 22:44 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-01-20 23:44 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2026-01-19 19:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] bpf: net_sched: Use direct helper calls instead of kfuncs in pro/epilogue Jakub Sitnicki
2026-01-19 22:50 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-01-20 23:45 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2026-01-19 19:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] bpf: Remove kfunc support in prologue and epilogue Jakub Sitnicki
2026-01-19 22:55 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-01-21 9:54 ` Jakub Sitnicki [this message]
2026-01-21 17:01 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-01-19 19:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] selftests/bpf: Remove tests for prologue/epilogue with kfuncs Jakub Sitnicki
2026-01-19 22:56 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-01-20 23:48 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2026-01-21 9:49 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2026-01-21 19:13 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2026-01-23 3:10 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] Switch from kfuncs to direct helper calls in prologue/epilogue Amery Hung
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=87h5sfthoj.fsf@cloudflare.com \
--to=jakub@cloudflare.com \
--cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@cloudflare.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--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