diff --git a/ci/diffs/0001-selftests-bpf-test-case-for-callback_depth-states-pr.patch b/ci/diffs/0001-selftests-bpf-test-case-for-callback_depth-states-pr.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index f9fa879..0000000
--- a/ci/diffs/0001-selftests-bpf-test-case-for-callback_depth-states-pr.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,129 +0,0 @@
-From 5c2bc5e2f81d3344095ae241032dde20a4ea2b48 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
-From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 17:41:21 +0200
-Subject: [PATCH 1/2] selftests/bpf: test case for callback_depth states
- pruning logic
-
-The test case was minimized from mailing list discussion [0].
-It is equivalent to the following C program:
-
-    struct iter_limit_bug_ctx { __u64 a; __u64 b; __u64 c; };
-
-    static __naked void iter_limit_bug_cb(void)
-    {
-    	switch (bpf_get_prandom_u32()) {
-    	case 1:  ctx->a = 42; break;
-    	case 2:  ctx->b = 42; break;
-    	default: ctx->c = 42; break;
-    	}
-    }
-
-    int iter_limit_bug(struct __sk_buff *skb)
-    {
-    	struct iter_limit_bug_ctx ctx = { 7, 7, 7 };
-
-    	bpf_loop(2, iter_limit_bug_cb, &ctx, 0);
-    	if (ctx.a == 42 && ctx.b == 42 && ctx.c == 7)
-    	  asm volatile("r1 /= 0;":::"r1");
-    	return 0;
-    }
-
-The main idea is that each loop iteration changes one of the state
-variables in a non-deterministic manner. Hence it is premature to
-prune the states that have two iterations left comparing them to
-states with one iteration left.
-E.g. {{7,7,7}, callback_depth=0} can reach state {42,42,7},
-while {{7,7,7}, callback_depth=1} can't.
-
-[0] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/9b251840-7cb8-4d17-bd23-1fc8071d8eef@linux.dev/
-
-Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
-Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
-Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240222154121.6991-3-eddyz87@gmail.com
-Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
----
- .../bpf/progs/verifier_iterating_callbacks.c  | 70 +++++++++++++++++++
- 1 file changed, 70 insertions(+)
-
-diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_iterating_callbacks.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_iterating_callbacks.c
-index 5905e036e0ea..a955a6358206 100644
---- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_iterating_callbacks.c
-+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_iterating_callbacks.c
-@@ -239,4 +239,74 @@ int bpf_loop_iter_limit_nested(void *unused)
- 	return 1000 * a + b + c;
- }
- 
-+struct iter_limit_bug_ctx {
-+	__u64 a;
-+	__u64 b;
-+	__u64 c;
-+};
-+
-+static __naked void iter_limit_bug_cb(void)
-+{
-+	/* This is the same as C code below, but written
-+	 * in assembly to control which branches are fall-through.
-+	 *
-+	 *   switch (bpf_get_prandom_u32()) {
-+	 *   case 1:  ctx->a = 42; break;
-+	 *   case 2:  ctx->b = 42; break;
-+	 *   default: ctx->c = 42; break;
-+	 *   }
-+	 */
-+	asm volatile (
-+	"r9 = r2;"
-+	"call %[bpf_get_prandom_u32];"
-+	"r1 = r0;"
-+	"r2 = 42;"
-+	"r0 = 0;"
-+	"if r1 == 0x1 goto 1f;"
-+	"if r1 == 0x2 goto 2f;"
-+	"*(u64 *)(r9 + 16) = r2;"
-+	"exit;"
-+	"1: *(u64 *)(r9 + 0) = r2;"
-+	"exit;"
-+	"2: *(u64 *)(r9 + 8) = r2;"
-+	"exit;"
-+	:
-+	: __imm(bpf_get_prandom_u32)
-+	: __clobber_all
-+	);
-+}
-+
-+SEC("tc")
-+__failure
-+__flag(BPF_F_TEST_STATE_FREQ)
-+int iter_limit_bug(struct __sk_buff *skb)
-+{
-+	struct iter_limit_bug_ctx ctx = { 7, 7, 7 };
-+
-+	bpf_loop(2, iter_limit_bug_cb, &ctx, 0);
-+
-+	/* This is the same as C code below,
-+	 * written in assembly to guarantee checks order.
-+	 *
-+	 *   if (ctx.a == 42 && ctx.b == 42 && ctx.c == 7)
-+	 *     asm volatile("r1 /= 0;":::"r1");
-+	 */
-+	asm volatile (
-+	"r1 = *(u64 *)%[ctx_a];"
-+	"if r1 != 42 goto 1f;"
-+	"r1 = *(u64 *)%[ctx_b];"
-+	"if r1 != 42 goto 1f;"
-+	"r1 = *(u64 *)%[ctx_c];"
-+	"if r1 != 7 goto 1f;"
-+	"r1 /= 0;"
-+	"1:"
-+	:
-+	: [ctx_a]"m"(ctx.a),
-+	  [ctx_b]"m"(ctx.b),
-+	  [ctx_c]"m"(ctx.c)
-+	: "r1"
-+	);
-+	return 0;
-+}
-+
- char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
--- 
-2.43.0
-