Re: [PATCH bpf-next v7 5/5] bpf: refactor kfunc checks using table-driven approach in verifier

[Leon Hwang]

On 11/3/26 04:10, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Mar 2026 at 07:45, Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On 8/3/26 21:46, Chengkaitao wrote:
>>> From: Kaitao Cheng <chengkaitao@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> Replace per-kfunc btf_id chains in list/rbtree/res_lock and graph node
>>> checks with btf_id_in_kfunc_table() and static kfunc tables for easier
>>> maintenance.
>>>
>>
>> Such refactoring should be the first patch? Less churn. Then, update the
>> list only.
>>
>> However, is_bpf_rbtree_api_kfunc(), is_bpf_res_spin_lock_kfunc(), and
>> BPF_RB_NODE should be excluded, because you didn't touch them in this
>> series.
> 
> I think moving clean up earlier makes some sense, but why exclude
> rbtree and res spin lock?
> Looks better to me to do them all.
> 

Okay. Acceptable for me to keep them.

Thanks,
Leon