[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <9A68EC8A-3F7B-4CA0-B75B-195BE5E7495A@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2026 21:03:16 +0800
From: Zesen Liu <ftyghome@...il.com>
To: bot+bpf-ci@...nel.org
Cc: ast@...nel.org,
daniel@...earbox.net,
andrii@...nel.org,
martin.lau@...ux.dev,
eddyz87@...il.com,
song@...nel.org,
yonghong.song@...ux.dev,
john.fastabend@...il.com,
kpsingh@...nel.org,
sdf@...ichev.me,
haoluo@...gle.com,
jolsa@...nel.org,
mattbobrowski@...gle.com,
rostedt@...dmis.org,
mhiramat@...nel.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com,
kuba@...nel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com,
horms@...nel.org,
dxu@...uu.xyz,
bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
electronlsr@...il.com,
gplhust955@...il.com,
haoran.ni.cs@...il.com,
martin.lau@...nel.org,
clm@...a.com,
ihor.solodrai@...ux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf 2/2] bpf: Require ARG_PTR_TO_MEM with memory flag
You're right. I'll add the missing flags to these prototypes and address this in v2.
> On Jan 7, 2026, at 20:44, bot+bpf-ci@...nel.org wrote:
>
> Would these helpers fail check_func_proto() after this change, causing
> BPF programs using them to fail verification? Should these prototypes
> be updated to include MEM_RDONLY (since they read from the memory), or
> should the check skip ARG_PTR_TO_FIXED_SIZE_MEM?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists