From: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org
To: a.s.protopopov@gmail.com,ast@kernel.org,daniel@iogearbox.net,andrii@kernel.org,eddyz87@gmail.com,memxor@gmail.com,almagui@kernel.org,john.fastabend@gmail.com,qmo@kernel.org,brauner@kernel.org,kpsingh@kernel.org,yonghong.song@linux.dev,jolsa@kernel.org,emil@etsalapatis.com,ihor.solodrai@linux.dev,sashal@kernel.org,bpf@vger.kernel.org,linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: a.s.protopopov@gmail.com,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
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 bpf-next 15/18] resolve_btfids: Tag fmod_ret candidates as targets
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2026 21:50:11 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <82dc259cd905abb5ad4fcbb8151553fb8680d4d71b1e52babd3e2d588a90656b@mail.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261106210314.1767267-15-a.s.protopopov@gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3921 bytes --]
> resolve_btfids: Tag fmod_ret candidates as targets
TL;DR: Nits only in resolve_btfids fmodret.c: duplicated alias-walk code in
mark_traceable_function(), its unused bool return, and possibly obsolete
section names (.meminit, .cpuinit, .devinit) in section_cannot_be_attached().
> diff --git a/tools/bpf/resolve_btfids/fmodret.c b/tools/bpf/resolve_btfids/fmodret.c
> new file mode 100644
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/bpf/resolve_btfids/fmodret.c
[ ... ]
> +static bool mark_traceable_function(struct elf_function_list *list,
> + Elf64_Section shndx, GElf_Addr address,
> + enum ftrace_site_kind kind)
> +{
> + size_t left = 0;
> + size_t right = list->nr;
> + size_t first;
> + size_t i;
> + bool found = false;
[ ... ]
> + if (first != SIZE_MAX) {
> + while (first && list->functions[first - 1].shndx == shndx &&
> + list->functions[first - 1].value ==
> + list->functions[first].value)
> + first--;
> + for (i = first; i < list->nr &&
> + list->functions[i].shndx == shndx &&
> + list->functions[i].value ==
> + list->functions[first].value; i++) {
> + list->functions[i].traceable = true;
> + found = true;
> + }
> + return found;
> + }
> + if (kind == FTRACE_SITE_PATCHABLE || !left)
> + return false;
> +
> + /* The nearest preceding function owns the call site. */
> + first = left - 1;
> + if (list->functions[first].shndx != shndx)
> + return false;
> + while (first && list->functions[first - 1].shndx == shndx &&
> + list->functions[first - 1].value == list->functions[first].value)
> + first--;
> + for (i = first; i < list->nr &&
> + list->functions[i].shndx == shndx &&
> + list->functions[i].value == list->functions[first].value; i++) {
> + if (!function_contains(&list->functions[i], address))
> + continue;
> + list->functions[i].traceable = true;
> + found = true;
> + }
> + return found;
> +}
This isn't a bug, but mark_traceable_function() has two near-identical blocks
that walk back to the first alias at a (shndx, value) pair and then loop
forward over the aliases. The second differs only by the
function_contains() test.
Could the walk back use function_at(list, shndx, list->functions[first].value),
with one forward loop that takes the containment test as a condition? Then
the two copies would not need to be kept in sync.
Also, this isn't a bug, but is the bool return of mark_traceable_function()
meant for something, such as a -v count of unmatched ftrace sites? None of
its callers in mark_relocated_ftrace_sites() and read_ftrace_site_range()
read the value, so could it return void and drop 'found'?
[ ... ]
> +static bool section_cannot_be_attached(const char *name)
> +{
> + return section_prefix(name, ".init.text") ||
> + section_prefix(name, ".exit.text") ||
> + section_prefix(name, ".noinstr.text") ||
> + section_prefix(name, ".meminit.text") ||
> + section_prefix(name, ".memexit.text") ||
> + section_prefix(name, ".cpuinit.text") ||
> + section_prefix(name, ".cpuexit.text") ||
> + section_prefix(name, ".devinit.text") ||
> + section_prefix(name, ".devexit.text");
> +}
This isn't a bug, but are .meminit.text, .memexit.text, .cpuinit.text,
.cpuexit.text, .devinit.text and .devexit.text still emitted anywhere?
In include/linux/init.h, __meminit is now either empty or __init, and the
__cpuinit/__devinit annotations were removed. Neither vmlinux.lds.h nor
scripts/module.lds.S places these sections, and modpost lists only
.init.text and .exit.text as init/exit text.
If they are gone, could section_cannot_be_attached() be reduced to
.init.text, .exit.text and .noinstr.text?
---
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/42294987431
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-06 21:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-06 21:02 [PATCH v1 bpf-next 01/18] bpf: Add BTF ID sets for fmod_ret targets Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:02 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 02/18] bpf: Add a btf_id_set8_entry helper Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:02 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 03/18] bpf: Build fmod_ret target sets from BTF decl tags Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:02 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 04/18] selftests/bpf: Declare bpf_fentry_test1 in tracing tests Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:02 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 05/18] bpf: Declare fmod_ret targets with BTF_FMODRET sets Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:02 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 06/18] selftests/bpf: Test fmod_ret BTF decl tags and attach permission Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:02 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 07/18] scripts: Add LLVM plugin infrastructure Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:02 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 08/18] bpf: Add the bpf_scan_ir LLVM plugin Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:02 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 09/18] bpf: Find fmod_ret candidates in bpf_scan_ir Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:02 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 10/18] bpf: Allow writes to private stack objects " Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:03 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 11/18] bpf: Follow PHIs " Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:03 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 12/18] bpf: Follow integer casts " Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:03 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 13/18] bpf: Check the return values of fmod_ret programs on found targets Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:03 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 14/18] bpf: Require the JIT for fmod_ret programs on found 64-bit targets Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:03 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 15/18] resolve_btfids: Tag fmod_ret candidates as targets Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:50 ` bot+bpf-ci [this message]
2026-11-06 21:03 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 16/18] selftests/bpf: Test fmod_ret candidates found by bpf_scan_ir Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:50 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-11-06 21:03 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 17/18] selftests/bpf: Enable bpf_scan_ir in the config Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:35 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-11-06 21:03 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 18/18] bpftool: List and show fmod_ret targets Anton Protopopov
2026-11-06 21:35 ` bot+bpf-ci
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=82dc259cd905abb5ad4fcbb8151553fb8680d4d71b1e52babd3e2d588a90656b@mail.kernel.org \
--to=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org \
--cc=a.s.protopopov@gmail.com \
--cc=almagui@kernel.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=mason@kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=qmo@kernel.org \
--cc=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®