[PATCH bpf-next v2 5/9] bpf, verifier: improve signed ranges inference for BPF_AND

[Alexei Starovoitov]

On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 11:48 AM Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2024-07-22 at 20:57 +0800, Shung-Hsi Yu wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > As a nitpick, I think that it would be good to have some shortened
> > > version of the derivation in the comments alongside the code.
> >
> > Agree it would. Will try to add a 2-4 sentence explanation.
> >
> > > (Maybe with a link to the mailing list).
> >
> > Adding a link to the mailing list seems out of the usual for comment in
> > verifier.c though, and it would be quite long. That said, it would be
> > nice to hint that there exists a more verbose version of the
> > explanation.
> >
> > Maybe an explicit "see commit for the full detail" at the end of
> > the added comment?
>
> Tbh, I find bounds deduction code extremely confusing.
> Imho, having lengthy comments there is a good thing.

+1
Pls document the logic in the code.
commit log is good, but good chunk of it probably should be copied
as a comment.

I've applied the rest of the patches and removed 'test 3' selftest.
Pls respin this patch and a test.
More than one test would be nice too.