Hi everyone, I wonder if there is anything else to do for this patch series. Alexei: Without that later removed change in patch 2, the intermediate state of the patches does not properly work. Eduard refered to that and agreed in the review for patch 7. Best regards, Cupertino Cupertino Miranda writes: > Hi everyone, > > New version. > There is one extra patch which implements some code improvements > suggested by Andrii. > > Thanks for your reviews! > > Regards, > Cupertino > > Changes from v1: > - Reordered patches in the series. > - Fix refactor to be acurate with original code. > - Fixed other mentioned small problems. > > Changes from v2: > - Added a patch to replace mark_reg_unknowon for __mark_reg_unknown in > the context of range computation. > - Reverted implementation of refactor to v1 which used a simpler > boolean return value in check function. > - Further relaxed MUL to allow it to still compute a range when neither > of its registers is a known value. > - Simplified tests based on Eduards example. > - Added messages in selftest commits. > > Changes from v3: > - Improved commit message of patch nr 1. > - Coding style fixes. > - Improve XOR and OR tests. > - Made function calls to pass struct bpf_reg_state pointer instead. > - Improved final code as a last patch. > > Cupertino Miranda (7): > bpf/verifier: replace calls to mark_reg_unknown. > bpf/verifier: refactor checks for range computation > bpf/verifier: improve XOR and OR range computation > selftests/bpf: XOR and OR range computation tests. > bpf/verifier: relax MUL range computation check > selftests/bpf: MUL range computation tests. > bpf/verifier: improve code after range computation recent changes. > > kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 111 ++++++++---------- > .../selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bounds.c | 63 ++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 109 insertions(+), 65 deletions(-)
