On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 02:52:01PM +0800, Pu Lehui wrote:
>
>
> On 2025/8/20 14:25, Chenghao Duan wrote:
> > In __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(), retval_off is only meaningful when
> > save_ret is true, so the current logic is correct. However, in the
>
> lgtm, and same for `ip_off`, pls patch it together.
I also checked at the time that ip_off is only initialized and assigned
when flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_IP_ARG is true. However, I noticed that the use
of ip_off also requires this condition, so the compiler did not issue a
warning.
Chenghao
>
> > original logic, retval_off is only initialized under certain
> > conditions, which may cause a build warning.
> >
> > So initialize retval_off unconditionally to fix it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chenghao Duan <duanchenghao@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 5 ++---
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
> > index 10e01ff06312..49bbda8372b0 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
> > @@ -1079,10 +1079,9 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im,
> > stack_size += 16;
> > save_ret = flags & (BPF_TRAMP_F_CALL_ORIG | BPF_TRAMP_F_RET_FENTRY_RET);
> > - if (save_ret) {
> > + if (save_ret)
> > stack_size += 16; /* Save both A5 (BPF R0) and A0 */
> > - retval_off = stack_size;
> > - }
> > + retval_off = stack_size;
> > stack_size += nr_arg_slots * 8;
> > args_off = stack_size;
