Subject: Re: [RFC patch 07/19] bpf: Provide BPF_PROG_RUN_PIN_ON_CPU() macro

From: Mathieu Desnoyers <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 13:50:27 -0500

On 14-Feb-2020 02:39:24 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
[...]
> +#define BPF_PROG_RUN_PIN_ON_CPU(prog, ctx) ({				\
> +	u32 ret;							\
> +	migrate_disable();						\
> +	ret = __BPF_PROG_RUN(prog, ctx, bpf_dispatcher_nopfunc);	\
> +	migrate_enable();						\
> +	ret; })

Does it really have to be a statement expression with a local variable ?

If so, we should consider renaming "ret" to "__ret" to minimize the
chances of a caller issuing BPF_PROG_RUN_PIN_ON_CPU with "ret" as
prog or ctx argument, which would lead to unexpected results.

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com