On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 5:09 PM Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 2023-11-20 at 17:04 -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > [...] > > > @@ -10309,8 +10311,19 @@ static int check_helper_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn > > > break; > > > case BPF_FUNC_loop: > > > update_loop_inline_state(env, meta.subprogno); > > > - err = push_callback_call(env, insn, insn_idx, meta.subprogno, > > > - set_loop_callback_state); > > > + /* Verifier relies on R1 value to determine if bpf_loop() iteration > > > + * is finished, thus mark it precise. > > > + */ > > > + mark_chain_precision(env, BPF_REG_1); > > > > huh? What about error handling? > > My bad. > Should I fix and re-send as V4 immediately or wait till tomorrow? Other than this issue everything looks good to me, but perhaps give Alexei a bit of time to take a look over latest version, just in case?
