On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 11:32:55PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 7:42 PM Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > From: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > There is a typo in comment for DFS algorithm in bpf/verifier.c. The top
> > element should not be popped until all its neighbors have been checked.
> > Fix it.
> >
> > Fixes: 475fb78fbf48 ("bpf: verifier (add branch/goto checks)")
> > Signed-off-by: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > index b83a8d420520..96ba5ea6d1a6 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > @@ -10662,7 +10662,7 @@ static int check_return_code(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> > * 3 let S be a stack
> > * 4 S.push(v)
> > * 5 while S is not empty
> > - * 6 t <- S.pop()
> > + * 6 t <- S.top()
>
> Even with this fix the comment is not quite accurate.
> I wonder whether we should keep it or delete it completely.
> At least please use 'peek' instead of 'top'.
I think the comment should be in words (like other code comments in the
kernel) instead.
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
