* [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-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
* [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
* [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-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 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 @ 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.