On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 9:57 PM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > Observation is correct. The patch is buggy, > > > > but the suggestion to follow process_dynptr_func() will lead > > > > to unnecessary complexity. > > > > dynptr-s are on stack with plenty of extra checks. > > > > > > The suggestion was to call process_timer_func, not process_dynptr_func. > > > > > > > In this case bpf_timer is in map_value. > > > > Much simpler is to follow KF_ARG_PTR_TO_MAP approach. > > > > > > What I meant by the example was that dynptr handling does the same > > > thing for kfuncs and helpers (using the same function), so timer > > > arguments should do the same (i.e. use process_timer_func), which will > > > do all checks for constant offset (ensuring var_off is tnum_is_const) > > > and match it against btf_record->timer_off. > > > > I don't follow. Please elaborate with a patch. > > The var_off and off is a part of the bug, but it's not the biggest part of it. > > Not compile tested. I see. All makes sense to me. Benjamin, pls incorporate it in your set.
