Re: [PATCH] bpf: add diagnostics for rejected memory and map accesses

[Alexei Starovoitov]

On Mon Sep 21, 2026 at 5:38 PM UTC, Suchit Karunakaran wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sept 2026 at 22:35, Alexei Starovoitov
> <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 09:16 PM Suchit Karunakaran <suchitkarunakaran@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >                                       verbose(env, "sign extending loads from arena are not supported yet\n");
> > > +                                     bpf_diag_policy(
> > > +                                             env, i + delta, "sign-extending arena load",
> > > +                                             "the current JIT does not support this load instruction for arena memory",
> > > +                                             "Use a kernel and architecture with JIT support for this arena load.");
> >
> > Did you read what AI generated for you?
> > "Use a kernel and architecture with JIT support for this arena load."
> > ?!?!
> >
> > Please apply human filter to every single line of "your" patches.
> >
> > pw-bot: cr
>
> Hi Alexei. I'm sorry for the oversight. I somehow misinterpreted it as
> "Use a kernel and architecture with JIT that supports this arena
> load." Is the following diagnostic message fine? If yes I'll correct
> it in v2.
> bpf_diag_policy(env, i + delta,
> "sign-extending arena load", "the current JIT backend doesn't
> implement sign-extending loads from arena memory",
>  "Use a kernel and architecture where the BPF JIT supports
> sign-extending loads from arena memory.");

No. That is still wrong. Put yourself in user's shoes.
How would you react to this message?