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 B51D72CCC5; Fri, 12 Jun 2026 13:57:11 +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=1781272632; cv=none; b=YlBpSEjdDfCCQi5zvsvhX1DODiWQE22m8okw1wCgorRE9uBj+p8N2kKXLQ9KPqEWk1Xwgpw9f7byvJqGTYIRILma6847EC1pWmBc7g0SLnlkCWoGk08XBcbyl7m4rvSWjVSH7UsbeiqK8OrK1z5oXYLrM8VDvkLW7CdJctxt3uI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781272632; c=relaxed/simple; bh=aAEGomf7fCgMtXxusNJUXzl2v7qaXrMxpBgHmFxftuE=; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: Subject:From:To:Cc:Date; b=C7F1AlpS5iy6iQCMnQydL9OAZqk9O6mLQ8x4gvom3dNb3rfcwx6cibbYBVOGPL0c0l8cfpRIHfjhXgyY9N4+1oKf5zATnbB9tmmSH7meaY2xnDotqxwhZS2GQv0DCjck8IGF34QyTjvJH4crmPlb9seEvHLL1A9yGrQsf1hFaGI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=DUY+W1Z2; 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="DUY+W1Z2" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F2B961F000E9; Fri, 12 Jun 2026 13:57:09 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1781272631; bh=/lNiQ+egB50H4alLMWj6od03wquW6amLjzzkohRA0d4=; h=In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date; b=DUY+W1Z27/fC+4LPI0X2jfJqGuKqlJeoS/uhj4/K+P1cr53u29Kmma93piFm5BlHV oGCBD9jRI8Z7OpTiTrVRQO3l0XFDGa2+SG9vw0e6K5Z6iHshBf3hKa8M/X6a4dIcG/ t7WbDvKam1Goi6VI/cpuH88y8S+F8PJvkCLF+mhsZF/Rs+M4C2MT1D8YZv3U9wTNsY l5sFE4Djs0GF21+ReBYB+miaZOFK4cKi5rET8vGr3up/4clG0O5p20JjvfjSCDg8ax BwAnqLfulfxsDLVCjkoQEkt5Fp92TggFpEQY6My0IxbyTpfaNsXeQE0z/Q3PVOLMsl pr7yFpvf7iqEQ== Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2909177856742632511==" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <6f5a32184a62bf2ef732ef44788fe82ec726bc12d59534ff0e23c3f0f103bfd0@mail.kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20260612130919.299124-5-jiayuan.chen@linux.dev> References: <20260612130919.299124-5-jiayuan.chen@linux.dev> Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 4/7] bpf, sockmap: keep sk_msg copy state in sync From: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org To: jiayuan.chen@linux.dev,bpf@vger.kernel.org Cc: rollkingzzc@gmail.com,stable@vger.kernel.org,2045gemini@gmail.com,john.fastabend@gmail.com,emil@etsalapatis.com,jiayuan.chen@linux.dev,daniel@iogearbox.net,sdf@fomichev.me,martin.lau@linux.dev,ast@kernel.org,andrii@kernel.org,eddyz87@gmail.com,memxor@gmail.com,song@kernel.org,yonghong.song@linux.dev,jolsa@kernel.org,davem@davemloft.net,edumazet@google.com,kuba@kernel.org,pabeni@redhat.com,horms@kernel.org,jakub@cloudflare.com,shuah@kernel.org,hawk@kernel.org,rhkrqnwk98@gmail.com,ihor.solodrai@linux.dev,cong.wang@bytedance.com,linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,netdev@vger.kernel.org,linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,ast@kernel.org,andrii@kernel.org,daniel@iogearbox.net,martin.lau@kernel.org,eddyz87@gmail.com,yonghong.song@linux.dev,clm@meta.com,ihor.solodrai@linux.dev Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2026 13:57:09 +0000 (UTC) --===============2909177856742632511== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c > index 6e345ca65ca1..643411e292ce 100644 > --- a/net/core/filter.c > +++ b/net/core/filter.c [ ... ] > @@ -2792,8 +2833,10 @@ static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_msg_pull_data_proto = { > BPF_CALL_4(bpf_msg_push_data, struct sk_msg *, msg, u32, start, > u32, len, u64, flags) > { > + bool sge_copy = false, nsge_copy = false, nnsge_copy = false; > struct scatterlist sge, nsge, nnsge, rsge = {0}, *psge; > u32 new, i = 0, l = 0, space, copy = 0, offset = 0; > + bool rsge_copy = false; > u8 *raw, *to, *from; > struct page *page; The netdev reverse xmas tree convention orders declarations longest to shortest (Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst). Here the new "bool rsge_copy = false;" sits below the shorter "u32 new, ..." line. Should rsge_copy move up with the other bool declarations? [ ... ] > @@ -3027,8 +3098,10 @@ BPF_CALL_4(bpf_msg_pop_data, struct sk_msg *, msg, u32, start, > */ > if (start != offset) { > struct scatterlist *nsge, *sge = sk_msg_elem(msg, i); > + bool sge_copy = sk_msg_elem_is_copy(msg, i); > int a = start - offset; > int b = sge->length - pop - a; > + u32 sge_idx = i; The same ordering question applies here. The new "bool sge_copy" and "u32 sge_idx" are interleaved with the shorter "int a" / "int b" declarations rather than sorted longest to shortest. Should these be reordered to follow the reverse xmas tree style? --- 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/27418314509 --===============2909177856742632511==--