On Mon, Feb 2, 2026 at 5:14 PM Chengkaitao <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 3, 2026 at 1:57 AM Alexei Starovoitov > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 2, 2026 at 1:01 AM Chengkaitao <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > From: Chengkaitao <[email protected]> > > > > > > For the following scenario: > > > struct tree_node { > > > struct bpf_rb_node node; > > > struct request __kptr *req; > > > u64 key; > > > }; > > > struct bpf_rb_root tree_root __contains(tree_node, node); > > > struct bpf_spin_lock tree_lock; > > > > > > If we need to traverse all nodes in the rbtree, retrieve the __kptr > > > pointer from each node, and read kernel data from the referenced > > > object, using bpf_kptr_xchg appears unavoidable. > > > > > > This patch skips the BPF verifier checks for bpf_kptr_xchg when > > > called while holding a lock. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chengkaitao <[email protected]> > > > > You ignored earlier feedback. This is not ok. > > > It's my full name. Every region has its own customs and traditions, > so this isn't an essential change.
We cannot accept your patch then. SOB has to be "Firstname Lastname"
