On Sat, 16 Sept 2023 at 18:44, Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 5:13 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
> <memxor@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > }
> > > > + if (aux->func && aux->func[subprog]->aux->exception_cb) {
> > > > + bpf_log(log,
> > > > + "Extension programs cannot replace exception callback\n");
> > > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > > + }
> > >
> > > This check is redundant because you already did this check above if (prog_extension branch)
> > > Remove this as it will never be reached.
> > >
> >
> > Good catch, will fix it in v4.
>
> No worries. I fixed this duplicate check while applying.
> Everything else can be addressed in the follow ups.
>
> This spam is a bit annoying:
> $ ./test_progs -t exceptions
> func#0 @0
> FENTRY/FEXIT programs cannot attach to exception callback
> processed 0 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 0
> peak_states 0 mark_read 0
>
> func#0 @0
> FENTRY/FEXIT programs cannot attach to exception callback
> processed 0 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 0
> peak_states 0 mark_read 0
Thanks for fixing it while applying. I will send a follow up to
silence these logs today.
