On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 9:57 PM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
<memxor@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > >
> > > > Observation is correct. The patch is buggy,
> > > > but the suggestion to follow process_dynptr_func() will lead
> > > > to unnecessary complexity.
> > > > dynptr-s are on stack with plenty of extra checks.
> > >
> > > The suggestion was to call process_timer_func, not process_dynptr_func.
> > >
> > > > In this case bpf_timer is in map_value.
> > > > Much simpler is to follow KF_ARG_PTR_TO_MAP approach.
> > >
> > > What I meant by the example was that dynptr handling does the same
> > > thing for kfuncs and helpers (using the same function), so timer
> > > arguments should do the same (i.e. use process_timer_func), which will
> > > do all checks for constant offset (ensuring var_off is tnum_is_const)
> > > and match it against btf_record->timer_off.
> >
> > I don't follow. Please elaborate with a patch.
> > The var_off and off is a part of the bug, but it's not the biggest part of it.
>
> Not compile tested.

I see. All makes sense to me.

Benjamin,
pls incorporate it in your set.