On Wed, Dec 3, 2025 at 8:34 PM Shuran Liu <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Song, > > Thanks for the review. > > > I don't get why we add this selftest here. It doesn't appear to be related > > to > > patch 1/2. > > The regression that patch 1/2 fixes was originally hit by an LSM program > calling bpf_d_path() from the bprm_check_security hook. The new subtest is a > minimal reproducer for that scenario: without patch 1/2 the string comparison > never matches due to verifier's faulty optimization, and with patch 1/2 it > behaves correctly.
I somehow didn't reproduce this in my local tests. Thanks for the explanation. Song
