From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (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 610971FDE31; Fri, 2 Oct 2026 05:16:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790918179; cv=none; b=LuZ9cKfBrDF2uS4OXashBaM+enaTU00MSbM+8T0XCWLp3p0wqIsaEFkfwxMx0wpBw4RSzJyuZJMnUIXTkCmSCa6QIa4FdeacSS4Mf/S9MDBhp8v5rlPXTJrDKeaf22J6ahg1LjdwRs3FHP5xamt0L9zn8Zg2w0lDCGAnWgoNXu0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790918179; c=relaxed/simple; bh=szMLHEIsPYGPBcNsMQqu4KTbB4Un+ASFkINpnnypcI0=; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: Subject:From:To:Cc:Date; b=pGlp518fuIH7lJ3qt5oKKJ5obNN8H5QwuXjS1Tq52MTICS5P9LogGw+ic1YYFPNZS3jGc55vekAbl5VvdIl7lhtPWZMlmV2Nc2KG6/usbE0dsP7dJfAzqlA7wasozFi1G8gx8y5QypkOvJs7s3pMfcdIBVcmSiP15jzID1cwF1Y= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=WExEL4j/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="WExEL4j/" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DFD1A1F000FF; Fri, 2 Oct 2026 05:16:16 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790918178; bh=fdbq3HRFuyvrIU82ByKul8ljBnoTsSoeLo/ZpuxDclU=; h=In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date; b=WExEL4j/nmjgZX+MwmgUbXFbkCu9MQ29rlxsZOcMhJC7NQkxAvsnKPvOc2O2O4wwB o6Za7Pd3IChaZ/FIDw3Zua2aIwQgVtEMxOXRkuBn9VCB77tQae91seSmx9FcE9A31P R+GMT2yhUnTK/qx3UGuwvjT8E71+3SCRi1N/vCXRUWrMHKpPd6/b/KaibkdkgOMQCy AgN4H2YbNsTJLeyehhziFdHjtD2wRRCQPPBjDa+QpiZlaWAUTTutnxzZfqbW4LXV4F TUAeE7uENVZG4VH1IYukQ5bYclyWb8e6XPpfNMKoInDrdJD0aI0icHurQFToaKCuDU M4t2lRc+o04kw== Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1405899604603047031==" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <30d677b5656d9fe07e2dba86d2bb1f1d5f5114cfc3f36e9d96297b70c230097b@mail.kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20261002044050.1277356-1-thepacketgeek@gmail.com> References: <20261002044050.1277356-1-thepacketgeek@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf, arm64: Fix text_mutex critical section in bpf_arch_text_poke() From: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org To: thepacketgeek@gmail.com,ast@kernel.org,daniel@iogearbox.net,andrii@kernel.org,eddyz87@gmail.com,memxor@gmail.com,martin.lau@linux.dev,song@kernel.org,yonghong.song@linux.dev,jolsa@kernel.org,emil@etsalapatis.com,ihor.solodrai@linux.dev,puranjay@kernel.org,xukuohai@huaweicloud.com,catalin.marinas@arm.com,will@kernel.org Cc: leitao@debian.org,bpf@vger.kernel.org,linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,ast@kernel.org,andrii@kernel.org,daniel@iogearbox.net,martin.lau@kernel.org,eddyz87@gmail.com,yonghong.song@linux.dev,mason@kernel.org,ihor.solodrai@linux.dev Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2026 05:16:16 +0000 (UTC) --===============1405899604603047031== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > bpf, arm64: Fix text_mutex critical section in bpf_arch_text_poke() TL;DR: Nit only: the new multi-line comment in bpf_arch_text_poke() (arm64 JIT) should put '/*' on its own line, per BPF comment style. No functional problems found. > diff --git a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c > --- a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c [ ... ] > @@ -3338,12 +3338,20 @@ int bpf_arch_text_poke(void *ip, enum bpf_text_poke_type old_t, > */ > plt_target = (u64)&dummy_tramp; > > + /* pages of the bpf prog pack are shared between progs, so the > + * set_memory_rw()/set_memory_ro() window below must be serialized > + * against other pokers too. > + */ > + mutex_lock(&text_mutex); > + This isn't a bug, but should the new multi-line comment put '/*' on a line by itself, as is the convention for BPF code? /* * Pages of the bpf prog pack are shared between progs, so the * set_memory_rw()/set_memory_ro() window below must be serialized * against other pokers too. */ [ ... ] --- AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug. See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/36966917973 --===============1405899604603047031==--