On Tue, Jul 1, 2025 at 6:45 AM Paul Chaignon <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > @@ -15426,12 +15418,12 @@ static int adjust_reg_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, > /* Got here implies adding two SCALAR_VALUEs */ > if (WARN_ON_ONCE(ptr_reg)) { > print_verifier_state(env, vstate, vstate->curframe, true); > - verbose(env, "verifier internal error: unexpected ptr_reg\n"); > + verifier_bug(env, "unexpected ptr_reg"); > return -EFAULT; > } > if (WARN_ON(!src_reg)) { > print_verifier_state(env, vstate, vstate->curframe, true); > - verbose(env, "verifier internal error: no src_reg\n"); > + verifier_bug(env, "no src_reg"); > return -EFAULT; > } These two don't need to change. There is WARN_ON there anyway and print_verifier_state() too. Changing the last verbose() to be conditional depending on .config will be surprising and inconsistent. The rest lgtm. -- pw-bot: cr