On Sun, 2026-08-16 at 16:36 -0700, Eduard Zingerman wrote: > On Sun, 2026-08-16 at 16:17 -0700, Eduard Zingerman wrote: > > On Sun, 2026-08-16 at 10:56 +0000, Yiyang Chen wrote: > > > Add a verifier test with one atomic RMW instruction reached through > > > PTR_TO_ARENA and PTR_TO_STACK paths. The verifier must reject the > > > shared instruction with the existing incompatible-pointer diagnostic. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Yiyang Chen <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_arena.c | 39 > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_arena.c > > > b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_arena.c > > > index b241bbcf54a8a..b22bab33301ab 100644 > > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_arena.c > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_arena.c > > > @@ -637,6 +637,45 @@ int non_arena_ptr_add_to_arena_ptr(void *ctx) > > > > > > #endif > > > > > > +static const struct bpf_insn addr_space_cast_insn = { > > > + .code = 0xbf, > > > + .dst_reg = BPF_REG_7, > > > + .src_reg = BPF_REG_7, > > > + .off = 1, > > > + .imm = 1, > > > +}; > > > + > > > +SEC("socket") > > > +__description("arena and stack atomic at the same instruction") > > > +__failure __msg("same insn cannot be used with different pointers") > > > +__arch_x86_64 > > > +__load_if_JITed() > > > +__naked void mixed_arena_stack_atomic(void) > > > +{ > > > + asm volatile (" \ > > > + r1 = %[arena] ll; \ > > > + r6 = r10; \ > > > + r6 += -8; \ > > > + r9 = 0; \ > > > + *(u64 *)(r6 + 0) = r9; \ > > > + r7 = 8192; \ > > > + .8byte %[addr_space_cast]; \ > > > > I'm going to fix this to: > > > > r7 = addr_space_cast(r7, 0, 1); \ > > > > as in the test case above. > > Waiting for CI [1]. > > > > [1] https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/pull/13325 > > > A...and it requires another exception for GCC-BPF: > https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/blob/bpf-next_base/ci/vmtest/configs/DENYLIST.test_progs-bpf_gcc > > Ihor, it's a third time GCC-BPF strikes this weekend. > What do people think about downgrading it to may-fail until the > DENYLIST decreases to something reasonable?
I'm not being fair here. ksock series shown a real deficiency in verier logic, matchers in Daniel's series were unstable. Please disregard the above suggestion.
