> On Fri, 2022-06-10 at 13:54 -0700, Song Liu wrote: > > + > > +void update_loop_inline_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 subprogno) > > static void ... > > > +{ > > + struct bpf_loop_inline_state *state = &cur_aux(env)->loop_inline_state; > > + struct bpf_reg_state *regs = cur_regs(env); > > + struct bpf_reg_state *flags_reg = ®s[BPF_REG_4]; > > + > > nit: we usually don't have empty lines here. > > > + int flags_is_zero = > > + register_is_const(flags_reg) && flags_reg->var_off.value == 0; > > If we replace "fit_for_inline" with "not_fit_for_inline", we can make the cannot > inline case faster with: > > if (state->not_fit_for_inline) > return; > > > + > > + if (state->initialized) { > > + state->fit_for_inline &= > > + flags_is_zero && > > + state->callback_subprogno == subprogno; > > + } else { > > + state->initialized = 1; > > + state->fit_for_inline = flags_is_zero; > > + state->callback_subprogno = subprogno; > > + } > > +} > > + Sorry, I'm not sure that I understand you correctly. Do you want me to rewrite the code as follows: struct bpf_loop_inline_state { int initialized:1; /* set to true upon first entry */ int not_fit_for_inline:1; /* false if callback function is thesame * at each call and flags are always zero */ u32 callback_subprogno; /* valid when fit_for_inline is true */ }; static void update_loop_inline_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 subprogno) { struct bpf_loop_inline_state *state = &cur_aux(env)->loop_inline_state; struct bpf_reg_state *regs = cur_regs(env); struct bpf_reg_state *flags_reg = ®s[BPF_REG_4]; int flags_is_zero = register_is_const(flags_reg) && flags_reg->var_off.value == 0; if (state->not_fit_for_inline) return; if (state->initialized) { state->not_fit_for_inline |= !flags_is_zero || state->callback_subprogno != subprogno; } else { state->initialized = 1; state->not_fit_for_inline = !flags_is_zero; state->callback_subprogno = subprogno; } } // ... static int optimize_bpf_loop(struct bpf_verifier_env *env) { // ... if (is_bpf_loop_call(insn) && !inline_state->not_fit_for_inline) { // ... } IMO, the code is less clear after such rewrite, also `update_loop_inline_state` is not on a hot path (it is called from `check_helper_call` only when helper is `bpf_loop`). Are you sure this rewrite is necessary? Thanks, Eduard