[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6b585a75-ae1a-1ad5-2756-bcce78fbd2fd@iogearbox.net>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2023 21:26:41 +0200
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@...valent.com>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: btf: restore resolve_mode when popping the
resolve stack
On 5/15/23 2:15 PM, Lorenz Bauer wrote:
> In commit 9b459804ff99 ("btf: fix resolving BTF_KIND_VAR after ARRAY, STRUCT, UNION, PTR")
> I fixed a bug that occurred during resolving of a DATASEC by strategically resetting
> resolve_mode. This fixes the immediate bug but leaves us open to future bugs where
> nested types have to be resolved.
Lgtm, is there a way we could also craft a test case for this corner case?
Thanks,
Daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists