From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: zhidao su <soolaugust@gmail.com>
Cc: sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
void@manifault.com, arighi@nvidia.com, changwoo@igalia.com,
peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com,
zhidao su <suzhidao@xiaomi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] tools/sched_ext: compat.bpf.h: fix scx_bpf_dsq_reenq___compat signature
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2026 14:42:50 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <acXSilgub4NvWHXj@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260326204238.3755737-2-suzhidao@xiaomi.com>
On Fri, Mar 27, 2026 at 04:42:35AM +0800, zhidao su wrote:
> scx_bpf_dsq_reenq() is declared with KF_IMPLICIT_ARGS in the kernel BTF,
> which means the BPF verifier automatically injects the
> struct bpf_prog_aux *aux parameter. The BPF-side weak symbol declaration
> must NOT include the implicit parameter.
>
> The previous declaration included an explicit aux__prog parameter, which
> caused BPF programs calling scx_bpf_dsq_reenq() through the compat macro
> to fail verification on kernels where the kfunc is available.
Did this actually cause verification failure tho? If BPF isn't ignoring the
implicit arg, it should have just failed ksym_exists test and then fell back
to the older interface or trigger scx_bpf_error().
It's rather obvious that most of your patches are AI slob and I don't see
much value in the selftests that you added either. I'll just revert your
previous patches. Please carefully consider whether what you're sending
actually contributes anything practical and carefully verify the code
changes and description before sending them. These frivolous and plausible
sounding but not actually correct patches are taking bandwidth without
actually improving anything. I'll likely ignore your submissions from now on
unless the trajectory changes substantially.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-27 0:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-26 20:42 [PATCH 0/4] sched_ext: fix three unreliable selftests and compat kfunc signature zhidao su
2026-03-26 20:42 ` [PATCH 1/4] tools/sched_ext: compat.bpf.h: fix scx_bpf_dsq_reenq___compat signature zhidao su
2026-03-27 0:42 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2026-03-26 20:42 ` [PATCH 2/4] selftests/sched_ext: enq_immed: fix IMMED reenqueue livelock zhidao su
2026-03-26 20:42 ` [PATCH 3/4] selftests/sched_ext: dsq_reenq: fix reliability with two-DSQ design zhidao su
2026-03-26 20:42 ` [PATCH 4/4] selftests/sched_ext: consume_immed: fix reliability with CPU affinity zhidao su
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=acXSilgub4NvWHXj@slm.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=soolaugust@gmail.com \
--cc=suzhidao@xiaomi.com \
--cc=void@manifault.com \
/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®