On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 12:50 AM Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 8:59 AM Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT_WRITABLE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING are > > trace type as well, which may also cause unexpected memory allocation if > > we set BPF_F_NO_PREALLOC. > > Let's also warn on both of them. > > > > Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 2 ++ > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c > > index df3ec6b05f05..f9c0f4889a3a 100644 > > --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c > > +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c > > @@ -12570,6 +12570,8 @@ static bool is_tracing_prog_type(enum bpf_prog_type type) > > case BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT: > > case BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT: > > case BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT: > > + case BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT_WRITABLE: > > + case BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING: > > BPF_TRACE_ITER should probably be excluded. Right, I have verified that BPF_TRACE_ITER can be excluded. Will change it. -- Regards Yafang
