linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] BPF changes for 6.18

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHk-=wj=JCe-4exEH=kJmhf4FfRmbhSqHxMiKiuhL5NWho_4hg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2025 08:16:48 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, 
	andrii@...nel.org, martin.lau@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, 
	kuba@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org, 
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] BPF changes for 6.18

On Wed, 1 Oct 2025 at 03:58, Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com> wrote:
>
> yes, either way will work fine, but perhaps the other way round to
> first optimize and then skip uprobe if needed is less confusing

Yes, thanks, that was how I felt looking at that resolution too.

> I ended up with changes below, should I send formal patches?

Please.

> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c
> @@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ static void subtest_basic_usdt(bool optimized)
>                 goto cleanup;
>  #endif
>
> -       alled = TRIGGER(1);
> +       called = TRIGGER(1);

Oops. That's me having fat-fingered things. Sorry.

I would have seen that silly mistake had I gotten the tests to build,
but as mentioned, there were multiple small issues that had unhelpful
error messages that I had given up.

              Linus