* [linux-next:master 7391/10864] kernel/bpf/verifier.c:619 mark_stack_slot_scratched() warn: should '1 << spi' be a 64 bit type?
@ 2022-01-07 8:20 ` Dan Carpenter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: kernel test robot @ 2022-01-06 0:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kbuild
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1638 bytes --]
CC: kbuild-all(a)lists.01.org
CC: Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>
TO: Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com>
CC: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
head: 7a769a3922d81cfc74ab4d90a9cc69485f260976
commit: 0f55f9ed21f96630c6ec96805d42f92c0b458b37 [7391/10864] bpf: Only print scratched registers and stack slots to verifier logs.
:::::: branch date: 16 hours ago
:::::: commit date: 3 weeks ago
config: xtensa-randconfig-m031-20220105 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220106/202201060848.nagWejwv-lkp(a)intel.com/config)
compiler: xtensa-linux-gcc (GCC) 11.2.0
If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
New smatch warnings:
kernel/bpf/verifier.c:619 mark_stack_slot_scratched() warn: should '1 << spi' be a 64 bit type?
Old smatch warnings:
arch/xtensa/include/asm/thread_info.h:91 current_thread_info() warn: inconsistent indenting
vim +619 kernel/bpf/verifier.c
0f55f9ed21f9663 Christy Lee 2021-12-16 616
0f55f9ed21f9663 Christy Lee 2021-12-16 617 static void mark_stack_slot_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 spi)
0f55f9ed21f9663 Christy Lee 2021-12-16 618 {
0f55f9ed21f9663 Christy Lee 2021-12-16 @619 env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1UL << spi;
0f55f9ed21f9663 Christy Lee 2021-12-16 620 }
0f55f9ed21f9663 Christy Lee 2021-12-16 621
---
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation
https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all@lists.01.org
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [linux-next:master 7391/10864] kernel/bpf/verifier.c:619 mark_stack_slot_scratched() warn: should '1 << spi' be a 64 bit type?
@ 2022-01-07 8:20 ` Dan Carpenter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2022-01-07 8:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kbuild, Christy Lee
Cc: lkp, kbuild-all, Linux Memory Management List, Alexei Starovoitov
tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
head: 7a769a3922d81cfc74ab4d90a9cc69485f260976
commit: 0f55f9ed21f96630c6ec96805d42f92c0b458b37 [7391/10864] bpf: Only print scratched registers and stack slots to verifier logs.
config: xtensa-randconfig-m031-20220105 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220106/202201060848.nagWejwv-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: xtensa-linux-gcc (GCC) 11.2.0
If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
New smatch warnings:
kernel/bpf/verifier.c:619 mark_stack_slot_scratched() warn: should '1 << spi' be a 64 bit type?
vim +619 kernel/bpf/verifier.c
0f55f9ed21f9663 Christy Lee 2021-12-16 617 static void mark_stack_slot_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 spi)
0f55f9ed21f9663 Christy Lee 2021-12-16 618 {
0f55f9ed21f9663 Christy Lee 2021-12-16 @619 env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1UL << spi;
Use 1ULL instead.
0f55f9ed21f9663 Christy Lee 2021-12-16 620 }
---
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation
https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all@lists.01.org
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [linux-next:master 7391/10864] kernel/bpf/verifier.c:619 mark_stack_slot_scratched() warn: should '1 << spi' be a 64 bit type?
@ 2022-01-07 8:20 ` Dan Carpenter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2022-01-07 8:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kbuild-all
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1219 bytes --]
tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
head: 7a769a3922d81cfc74ab4d90a9cc69485f260976
commit: 0f55f9ed21f96630c6ec96805d42f92c0b458b37 [7391/10864] bpf: Only print scratched registers and stack slots to verifier logs.
config: xtensa-randconfig-m031-20220105 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220106/202201060848.nagWejwv-lkp(a)intel.com/config)
compiler: xtensa-linux-gcc (GCC) 11.2.0
If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
New smatch warnings:
kernel/bpf/verifier.c:619 mark_stack_slot_scratched() warn: should '1 << spi' be a 64 bit type?
vim +619 kernel/bpf/verifier.c
0f55f9ed21f9663 Christy Lee 2021-12-16 617 static void mark_stack_slot_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 spi)
0f55f9ed21f9663 Christy Lee 2021-12-16 618 {
0f55f9ed21f9663 Christy Lee 2021-12-16 @619 env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1UL << spi;
Use 1ULL instead.
0f55f9ed21f9663 Christy Lee 2021-12-16 620 }
---
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation
https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all@lists.01.org
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs
2022-01-07 8:20 ` Dan Carpenter
@ 2022-01-08 0:58 ` Christy Lee
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Christy Lee @ 2022-01-08 0:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dan.carpenter
Cc: ast, christylee, kbuild-all, kbuild, linux-mm, bpf, kernel-team,
christyc.y.lee, kernel test robot
env->scratched_stack_slots is a 64-bit value, we should use ULL
instead of UL literal values.
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com>
---
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index bfb45381fb3f..a8587210907d 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -616,7 +616,7 @@ static void mark_reg_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno)
static void mark_stack_slot_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 spi)
{
- env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1UL << spi;
+ env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1ULL << spi;
}
static bool reg_scratched(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno)
@@ -637,14 +637,14 @@ static bool verifier_state_scratched(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
static void mark_verifier_state_clean(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
{
env->scratched_regs = 0U;
- env->scratched_stack_slots = 0UL;
+ env->scratched_stack_slots = 0ULL;
}
/* Used for printing the entire verifier state. */
static void mark_verifier_state_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
{
env->scratched_regs = ~0U;
- env->scratched_stack_slots = ~0UL;
+ env->scratched_stack_slots = ~0ULL;
}
/* The reg state of a pointer or a bounded scalar was saved when
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs
@ 2022-01-08 0:58 ` Christy Lee
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Christy Lee @ 2022-01-08 0:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kbuild-all
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1458 bytes --]
env->scratched_stack_slots is a 64-bit value, we should use ULL
instead of UL literal values.
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com>
---
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index bfb45381fb3f..a8587210907d 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -616,7 +616,7 @@ static void mark_reg_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno)
static void mark_stack_slot_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 spi)
{
- env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1UL << spi;
+ env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1ULL << spi;
}
static bool reg_scratched(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno)
@@ -637,14 +637,14 @@ static bool verifier_state_scratched(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
static void mark_verifier_state_clean(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
{
env->scratched_regs = 0U;
- env->scratched_stack_slots = 0UL;
+ env->scratched_stack_slots = 0ULL;
}
/* Used for printing the entire verifier state. */
static void mark_verifier_state_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
{
env->scratched_regs = ~0U;
- env->scratched_stack_slots = ~0UL;
+ env->scratched_stack_slots = ~0ULL;
}
/* The reg state of a pointer or a bounded scalar was saved when
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs
2022-01-08 0:58 ` Christy Lee
@ 2022-01-10 21:52 ` Song Liu
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Song Liu @ 2022-01-10 21:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christy Lee
Cc: Dan Carpenter, Alexei Starovoitov, kbuild-all, kbuild, Linux-MM,
bpf, Kernel Team, christyc.y.lee, kernel test robot
On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 4:59 PM Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com> wrote:
>
> env->scratched_stack_slots is a 64-bit value, we should use ULL
> instead of UL literal values.
>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com>
The fix looks good to me. Thus:
Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
However, the patch looks corrupted. Also, the subject is probably too
long (./scripts/checkpatch.pl should complain about it).
Thanks,
Song
> ---
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index bfb45381fb3f..a8587210907d 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -616,7 +616,7 @@ static void mark_reg_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno)
>
> static void mark_stack_slot_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 spi)
> {
> - env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1UL << spi;
> + env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1ULL << spi;
> }
>
> static bool reg_scratched(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno)
> @@ -637,14 +637,14 @@ static bool verifier_state_scratched(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> static void mark_verifier_state_clean(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> {
> env->scratched_regs = 0U;
> - env->scratched_stack_slots = 0UL;
> + env->scratched_stack_slots = 0ULL;
> }
>
> /* Used for printing the entire verifier state. */
> static void mark_verifier_state_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> {
> env->scratched_regs = ~0U;
> - env->scratched_stack_slots = ~0UL;
> + env->scratched_stack_slots = ~0ULL;
> }
>
> /* The reg state of a pointer or a bounded scalar was saved when
> --
> 2.30.2
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs
@ 2022-01-10 21:52 ` Song Liu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Song Liu @ 2022-01-10 21:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kbuild-all
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1887 bytes --]
On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 4:59 PM Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com> wrote:
>
> env->scratched_stack_slots is a 64-bit value, we should use ULL
> instead of UL literal values.
>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com>
The fix looks good to me. Thus:
Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
However, the patch looks corrupted. Also, the subject is probably too
long (./scripts/checkpatch.pl should complain about it).
Thanks,
Song
> ---
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index bfb45381fb3f..a8587210907d 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -616,7 +616,7 @@ static void mark_reg_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno)
>
> static void mark_stack_slot_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 spi)
> {
> - env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1UL << spi;
> + env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1ULL << spi;
> }
>
> static bool reg_scratched(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno)
> @@ -637,14 +637,14 @@ static bool verifier_state_scratched(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> static void mark_verifier_state_clean(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> {
> env->scratched_regs = 0U;
> - env->scratched_stack_slots = 0UL;
> + env->scratched_stack_slots = 0ULL;
> }
>
> /* Used for printing the entire verifier state. */
> static void mark_verifier_state_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> {
> env->scratched_regs = ~0U;
> - env->scratched_stack_slots = ~0UL;
> + env->scratched_stack_slots = ~0ULL;
> }
>
> /* The reg state of a pointer or a bounded scalar was saved when
> --
> 2.30.2
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs
2022-01-10 21:52 ` Song Liu
@ 2022-01-10 22:12 ` Christy Lee
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Christy Lee @ 2022-01-10 22:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Song Liu
Cc: Christy Lee, Dan Carpenter, Alexei Starovoitov, kbuild-all,
kbuild, Linux-MM, bpf, Kernel Team, kernel test robot
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 1:52 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 4:59 PM Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com> wrote:
> >
> > env->scratched_stack_slots is a 64-bit value, we should use ULL
> > instead of UL literal values.
> >
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com>
>
> The fix looks good to me. Thus:
>
> Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
>
> However, the patch looks corrupted. Also, the subject is probably too
> long (./scripts/checkpatch.pl should complain about it).
>
I just checked that even with an absurdly long subject (more than 200
characters), ./scripts/checkpatch.pl doesn't complain. It only complains
when the commit message body has longer than 75 characters but not the
subject line. What's the maximum subject line length?
Christy
> Thanks,
> Song
>
>
> > ---
> > kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 6 +++---
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > index bfb45381fb3f..a8587210907d 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > @@ -616,7 +616,7 @@ static void mark_reg_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno)
> >
> > static void mark_stack_slot_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 spi)
> > {
> > - env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1UL << spi;
> > + env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1ULL << spi;
> > }
> >
> > static bool reg_scratched(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno)
> > @@ -637,14 +637,14 @@ static bool verifier_state_scratched(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> > static void mark_verifier_state_clean(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> > {
> > env->scratched_regs = 0U;
> > - env->scratched_stack_slots = 0UL;
> > + env->scratched_stack_slots = 0ULL;
> > }
> >
> > /* Used for printing the entire verifier state. */
> > static void mark_verifier_state_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> > {
> > env->scratched_regs = ~0U;
> > - env->scratched_stack_slots = ~0UL;
> > + env->scratched_stack_slots = ~0ULL;
> > }
> >
> > /* The reg state of a pointer or a bounded scalar was saved when
> > --
> > 2.30.2
> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs
@ 2022-01-10 22:12 ` Christy Lee
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Christy Lee @ 2022-01-10 22:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kbuild-all
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2353 bytes --]
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 1:52 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 4:59 PM Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com> wrote:
> >
> > env->scratched_stack_slots is a 64-bit value, we should use ULL
> > instead of UL literal values.
> >
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com>
>
> The fix looks good to me. Thus:
>
> Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
>
> However, the patch looks corrupted. Also, the subject is probably too
> long (./scripts/checkpatch.pl should complain about it).
>
I just checked that even with an absurdly long subject (more than 200
characters), ./scripts/checkpatch.pl doesn't complain. It only complains
when the commit message body has longer than 75 characters but not the
subject line. What's the maximum subject line length?
Christy
> Thanks,
> Song
>
>
> > ---
> > kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 6 +++---
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > index bfb45381fb3f..a8587210907d 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > @@ -616,7 +616,7 @@ static void mark_reg_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno)
> >
> > static void mark_stack_slot_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 spi)
> > {
> > - env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1UL << spi;
> > + env->scratched_stack_slots |= 1ULL << spi;
> > }
> >
> > static bool reg_scratched(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno)
> > @@ -637,14 +637,14 @@ static bool verifier_state_scratched(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> > static void mark_verifier_state_clean(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> > {
> > env->scratched_regs = 0U;
> > - env->scratched_stack_slots = 0UL;
> > + env->scratched_stack_slots = 0ULL;
> > }
> >
> > /* Used for printing the entire verifier state. */
> > static void mark_verifier_state_scratched(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> > {
> > env->scratched_regs = ~0U;
> > - env->scratched_stack_slots = ~0UL;
> > + env->scratched_stack_slots = ~0ULL;
> > }
> >
> > /* The reg state of a pointer or a bounded scalar was saved when
> > --
> > 2.30.2
> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs
2022-01-10 22:12 ` Christy Lee
@ 2022-01-10 22:25 ` Song Liu
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Song Liu @ 2022-01-10 22:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christy Lee
Cc: Christy Lee, Dan Carpenter, Alexei Starovoitov, kbuild-all,
kbuild, Linux-MM, bpf, Kernel Team, kernel test robot
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 2:13 PM Christy Lee <christyc.y.lee@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 1:52 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 4:59 PM Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > env->scratched_stack_slots is a 64-bit value, we should use ULL
> > > instead of UL literal values.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com>
> >
> > The fix looks good to me. Thus:
> >
> > Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
> >
> > However, the patch looks corrupted. Also, the subject is probably too
> > long (./scripts/checkpatch.pl should complain about it).
> >
>
> I just checked that even with an absurdly long subject (more than 200
> characters), ./scripts/checkpatch.pl doesn't complain. It only complains
> when the commit message body has longer than 75 characters but not the
> subject line. What's the maximum subject line length?
Hmm.. you are right. I somehow thought there was a limit by checkpatch.
I would personally limit it to 75 characters though.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs
@ 2022-01-10 22:25 ` Song Liu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Song Liu @ 2022-01-10 22:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kbuild-all
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1176 bytes --]
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 2:13 PM Christy Lee <christyc.y.lee@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 1:52 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 4:59 PM Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > env->scratched_stack_slots is a 64-bit value, we should use ULL
> > > instead of UL literal values.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com>
> >
> > The fix looks good to me. Thus:
> >
> > Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
> >
> > However, the patch looks corrupted. Also, the subject is probably too
> > long (./scripts/checkpatch.pl should complain about it).
> >
>
> I just checked that even with an absurdly long subject (more than 200
> characters), ./scripts/checkpatch.pl doesn't complain. It only complains
> when the commit message body has longer than 75 characters but not the
> subject line. What's the maximum subject line length?
Hmm.. you are right. I somehow thought there was a limit by checkpatch.
I would personally limit it to 75 characters though.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs
2022-01-10 22:12 ` Christy Lee
(?)
@ 2022-01-11 9:48 ` Dan Carpenter
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2022-01-11 9:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christy Lee
Cc: Song Liu, Christy Lee, Alexei Starovoitov, kbuild-all, kbuild,
Linux-MM, bpf, Kernel Team, kernel test robot
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 02:12:58PM -0800, Christy Lee wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 1:52 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 4:59 PM Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > env->scratched_stack_slots is a 64-bit value, we should use ULL
> > > instead of UL literal values.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com>
> >
> > The fix looks good to me. Thus:
> >
> > Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
> >
> > However, the patch looks corrupted. Also, the subject is probably too
> > long (./scripts/checkpatch.pl should complain about it).
> >
>
> I just checked that even with an absurdly long subject (more than 200
> characters), ./scripts/checkpatch.pl doesn't complain. It only complains
> when the commit message body has longer than 75 characters but not the
> subject line. What's the maximum subject line length?
>
People say 50 characters but that just seems more aspirational than
realistic. This patch needs a subsystem prefix as well.
regards,
dan carpenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs
@ 2022-01-11 9:48 ` Dan Carpenter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2022-01-11 9:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kbuild
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1189 bytes --]
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 02:12:58PM -0800, Christy Lee wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 1:52 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 4:59 PM Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > env->scratched_stack_slots is a 64-bit value, we should use ULL
> > > instead of UL literal values.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com>
> >
> > The fix looks good to me. Thus:
> >
> > Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
> >
> > However, the patch looks corrupted. Also, the subject is probably too
> > long (./scripts/checkpatch.pl should complain about it).
> >
>
> I just checked that even with an absurdly long subject (more than 200
> characters), ./scripts/checkpatch.pl doesn't complain. It only complains
> when the commit message body has longer than 75 characters but not the
> subject line. What's the maximum subject line length?
>
People say 50 characters but that just seems more aspirational than
realistic. This patch needs a subsystem prefix as well.
regards,
dan carpenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs
@ 2022-01-11 9:48 ` Dan Carpenter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2022-01-11 9:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kbuild-all
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1189 bytes --]
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 02:12:58PM -0800, Christy Lee wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 1:52 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 4:59 PM Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > env->scratched_stack_slots is a 64-bit value, we should use ULL
> > > instead of UL literal values.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com>
> >
> > The fix looks good to me. Thus:
> >
> > Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
> >
> > However, the patch looks corrupted. Also, the subject is probably too
> > long (./scripts/checkpatch.pl should complain about it).
> >
>
> I just checked that even with an absurdly long subject (more than 200
> characters), ./scripts/checkpatch.pl doesn't complain. It only complains
> when the commit message body has longer than 75 characters but not the
> subject line. What's the maximum subject line length?
>
People say 50 characters but that just seems more aspirational than
realistic. This patch needs a subsystem prefix as well.
regards,
dan carpenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs
2022-01-11 9:48 ` Dan Carpenter
@ 2022-01-11 17:56 ` Alexei Starovoitov
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2022-01-11 17:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dan Carpenter
Cc: Christy Lee, Song Liu, Christy Lee, Alexei Starovoitov,
kbuild-all, kbuild, Linux-MM, bpf, Kernel Team,
kernel test robot
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 1:49 AM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 02:12:58PM -0800, Christy Lee wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 1:52 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 4:59 PM Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > env->scratched_stack_slots is a 64-bit value, we should use ULL
> > > > instead of UL literal values.
> > > >
> > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > > > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com>
> > >
> > > The fix looks good to me. Thus:
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
> > >
> > > However, the patch looks corrupted. Also, the subject is probably too
> > > long (./scripts/checkpatch.pl should complain about it).
> > >
> >
> > I just checked that even with an absurdly long subject (more than 200
> > characters), ./scripts/checkpatch.pl doesn't complain. It only complains
> > when the commit message body has longer than 75 characters but not the
> > subject line. What's the maximum subject line length?
> >
>
> People say 50 characters but that just seems more aspirational than
> realistic. This patch needs a subsystem prefix as well.
I fixed patch subj and applied to bpf tree.
Thanks everyone.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs
@ 2022-01-11 17:56 ` Alexei Starovoitov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2022-01-11 17:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kbuild-all
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1362 bytes --]
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 1:49 AM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 02:12:58PM -0800, Christy Lee wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 1:52 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 4:59 PM Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > env->scratched_stack_slots is a 64-bit value, we should use ULL
> > > > instead of UL literal values.
> > > >
> > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > > > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <christylee@fb.com>
> > >
> > > The fix looks good to me. Thus:
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
> > >
> > > However, the patch looks corrupted. Also, the subject is probably too
> > > long (./scripts/checkpatch.pl should complain about it).
> > >
> >
> > I just checked that even with an absurdly long subject (more than 200
> > characters), ./scripts/checkpatch.pl doesn't complain. It only complains
> > when the commit message body has longer than 75 characters but not the
> > subject line. What's the maximum subject line length?
> >
>
> People say 50 characters but that just seems more aspirational than
> realistic. This patch needs a subsystem prefix as well.
I fixed patch subj and applied to bpf tree.
Thanks everyone.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-01-11 17:56 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-01-06 0:09 [linux-next:master 7391/10864] kernel/bpf/verifier.c:619 mark_stack_slot_scratched() warn: should '1 << spi' be a 64 bit type? kernel test robot
2022-01-07 8:20 ` Dan Carpenter
2022-01-07 8:20 ` Dan Carpenter
2022-01-08 0:58 ` [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs Christy Lee
2022-01-08 0:58 ` Christy Lee
2022-01-10 21:52 ` Song Liu
2022-01-10 21:52 ` Song Liu
2022-01-10 22:12 ` Christy Lee
2022-01-10 22:12 ` Christy Lee
2022-01-10 22:25 ` Song Liu
2022-01-10 22:25 ` Song Liu
2022-01-11 9:48 ` Dan Carpenter
2022-01-11 9:48 ` Dan Carpenter
2022-01-11 9:48 ` Dan Carpenter
2022-01-11 17:56 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-01-11 17:56 ` Alexei Starovoitov
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.