On Tue, 27 Oct 2020, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> From: Alan Maguire <[email protected]>
>
> [ Upstream commit eb58bbf2e5c7917aa30bf8818761f26bbeeb2290 ]
>
> bpf iter size increase to PAGE_SIZE << 3 means overflow tests assuming
> page size need to be bumped also.
>
Alexei can correct me if I've got this wrong but I don't believe
it's a stable backport candidate.
This selftests change should only be relevant when the BPF iterator
size has been bumped up as it was in
af65320 bpf: Bump iter seq size to support BTF representation of large
data structures
...so I don't _think_ this commit belongs in stable unless the
above commit is backported also (and unless I'm missing something
I don't see a burning reason to do that currently).
Backporting this alone will likely induce bpf test failures.
Apologies if the "Fix" in the title was misleading; it should
probably have been "Update" to reflect the fact it's not fixing
an existing bug but rather updating the test to operate correctly
in the context of other changes in the for-next patch series
it was part of.
Thanks!
Alan
On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 03:42:10PM +0000, Alan Maguire wrote:
>On Tue, 27 Oct 2020, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>
>> From: Alan Maguire <[email protected]>
>>
>> [ Upstream commit eb58bbf2e5c7917aa30bf8818761f26bbeeb2290 ]
>>
>> bpf iter size increase to PAGE_SIZE << 3 means overflow tests assuming
>> page size need to be bumped also.
>>
>
>Alexei can correct me if I've got this wrong but I don't believe
>it's a stable backport candidate.
>
>This selftests change should only be relevant when the BPF iterator
>size has been bumped up as it was in
>
>af65320 bpf: Bump iter seq size to support BTF representation of large
>data structures
>
>...so I don't _think_ this commit belongs in stable unless the
>above commit is backported also (and unless I'm missing something
>I don't see a burning reason to do that currently).
>
>Backporting this alone will likely induce bpf test failures.
>Apologies if the "Fix" in the title was misleading; it should
>probably have been "Update" to reflect the fact it's not fixing
>an existing bug but rather updating the test to operate correctly
>in the context of other changes in the for-next patch series
>it was part of.
I'll drop it, thanks!
--
Thanks,
Sasha