On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 3:43 PM Benedict Schlueter <Benedict.Schlueter@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On 02/06/2021 19:41, Martin KaFai Lau wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 05:23:19PM +0200, Benedict Schlueter wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I assume its clear what this patch does. > >> > >> > >> From 9618e4475b812651c3fe481af885757675fc4ae2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > >> From: Benedict Schlueter <benedict.schlueter@xxxxxx> > >> Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 17:16:13 +0200 > >> Subject: use correct format string specifier for unsigned 32 Bit > >> bounds print statements > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Benedict Schlueter <benedict.schlueter@xxxxxx> > >> --- > >> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 4 ++-- > >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c > >> index 1de4b8c6ee42..e107996c7220 100644 > >> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c > >> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c > >> @@ -690,11 +690,11 @@ static void print_verifier_state(struct > >> bpf_verifier_env *env, > >> (int)(reg->s32_max_value)); > >> if (reg->u32_min_value != reg->umin_value && > >> reg->u32_min_value != U32_MIN) > >> - verbose(env, ",u32_min_value=%d", > >> + verbose(env, ",u32_min_value=%u", > >> (int)(reg->u32_min_value)); > > "%u" and (int) cast don't make sense. > Yep, changed to unsigned int for consistency with the other cases. Is > this necessary? Since reg->u32_min_value is already a unsigned 32 bit > number. > > It needs a proper commit message to explain why the change is needed > > and also a Fixes tag. Please refer to Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst. > > Sorry should have read this more carefully before. Everything should be > included right now. > > From fd076dc5f2bd5ec4e9cb49530e77cf2d3e4f42c2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Benedict Schlueter <benedict.schlueter@xxxxxx> > Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 21:42:39 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH bpf-next] > use correct format string specifier for unsigned 32 bounds Please resubmit the patch. See 'Submitting patches' in Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst
