On 2025/6/23 20:03, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 07:55:52PM +0800, Aaron Lu wrote:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 10:17:15AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 03:06:17PM +0800, Aaron Lu wrote:
Ping?
On Thu, Jun 05, 2025 at 03:09:21PM +0800, Aaron Lu wrote:
Hello,
Wei reported when loading his bpf prog in 5.10.200 kernel, host would panic, this didn't happen in 5.10.135 kernel. Test on latest v5.10.238 still has this panic.
If a fix is not easy for these stable kernels, I think we should revert this commit? Because for whatever bpf progs, the bpf verifier should not panic the kernel.
Regarding revert, per my test, the following four commits in linux-5.10.y branch have to be reverted and after that, the kernel does not panic anymore: commit 2474ec58b96d("bpf: allow precision tracking for programs with subprogs") commit 7ca3e7459f4a("bpf: stop setting precise in current state") commit 1952a4d5e4cf("bpf: aggressively forget precise markings during state checkpointing") commit 4af2d9ddb7e7("selftests/bpf: make test_align selftest more robust")
Hi Aaron, Greg,
Sorry for the late. Just found a fix [0] for this issue, we don't need to revert this bugfix series. Hope that will help!
Link: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf.git/commit/?id=4bb7e... [0]
Can you send the reverts for this, so that you get credit for finding and fixing this issue, and you can put the correct wording in the commit messages for why they need to be reverted?
No problem, thanks for the info.
I have sent them: https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20250623115403.299-1-ziqianlu@bytedance.com/
All now queued up, thanks!
greg k-h