Re: [PATCH bpf-next v8 4/6] selftests/bpf: Adjust veristat stack depth parsing

> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/veristat.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/veristat.c
> index c9c257784ee3d..5c0ec3edce720 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/veristat.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/veristat.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -1025,11 +1027,24 @@ static int parse_verif_log(char * const buf, size_t buf_sz, struct verif_stats *
>  			&s->stats[MARK_READ_MAX_LEN]))
>  		continue;
>
> +	/*
> +	 * New kernels emit one "subprog <id> (<name>) <kind>" record
> +	 * per subprogram with the stack depth at the end, while old
> +	 * kernels emit a single "stack depth <a+...+n> max <max>"
> +	 * line. Match both formats so veristat works against either
> +	 * kernel.
> +	 */
> +	if (sscanf(cur, "stack depth max %ld", &s->stats[MAX_STACK]) == 1)
> +		continue;
> +	if (sscanf(cur, "subprog %*d %*s %*s insns_self %*d insns_total %*d stack %ld", &sub_stack) == 1) {

This isn't a bug, but would it read better to keep the same N == sscanf(...)
form as the neighbouring checks in this loop, so the block stays consistent?

The pre-existing checks just above use:

   if (1 == sscanf(cur, "verification time %ld usec\n", ...))

   if (5 == sscanf(cur, "processed %ld insns (limit %*d) ...

and the legacy check just below uses:

   if (2 == sscanf(cur, "stack depth %511s max %ld", ...

so the new checks alternate the comparison direction within about fifteen
lines.

> +		s->stats[STACK] += sub_stack;
> +		continue;
> +	}
>  	if (2 == sscanf(cur, "stack depth %511s max %ld", stack, &s->stats[MAX_STACK]))
>  		continue;
>  }

[ ... ]


---
AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug.
See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md

CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/31647029137