From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2025 16:10:42 -0700 > On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 2:22 PM Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > There are some failure paths in bpf_int_jit_compile() that are not > > worth triggering a warning in __bpf_prog_ret0_warn(). > > > > For example, if we fail to allocate memory in bpf_int_jit_compile(), > > we should propagate -ENOMEM to userspace instead of attaching > > __bpf_prog_ret0_warn(). > > > > Let's pass &err to bpf_int_jit_compile() to propagate errno. > > Is there any reason we are not just returning ERR_PTR() instead of the > approach in this patch? That seems more canonical within BPF > subsystem, if we need to return error for pointer-returning functions?
