From: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@oracle.com>
To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
willemb@google.com, davem@davemloft.net, shuah@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 1/2] tools: psock_lib: tighten conditions checked in sock_setfilter
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 17:48:48 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170104224848.GB31756@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <586D7692.4000604@iogearbox.net>
On (01/04/17 23:26), Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>
> >>As it stands it makes it a bit harder to parse / less readable with macros
> >>actually. Rest seems fine, thanks.
Usually macros are there (a) as an abstraction so you
dont have to hard-code things, and, (b) to make things
more readable. (maybe that's why the 1992 VJ paper on
BPF came up with these macros?)
I think we differ on code-aesthetics (not correctness) here.
It was not immediately obvious to me that "0x15 is actually
BPF_JMP + BPF_JEQ + BPF_K" etc, when I wanted to extend
the bpf_prog to harden the checks in the existing code.
Would it be ok to leave the extremely subjective
"make this more readable" part for you to tackle later?
Or I can just drop patch1, and you can fix it to your
satisfaction later.
--Sowmini
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-04 22:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-04 18:45 [PATCH v3 net-next 0/2] tools: psock_tpacket bug fixes Sowmini Varadhan
2017-01-04 18:45 ` [PATCH v3 net-next 1/2] tools: psock_lib: tighten conditions checked in sock_setfilter Sowmini Varadhan
2017-01-04 22:16 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-04 22:22 ` Sowmini Varadhan
2017-01-04 22:26 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-04 22:48 ` Sowmini Varadhan [this message]
2017-01-04 22:59 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-04 22:37 ` Shuah Khan
2017-01-04 22:49 ` Sowmini Varadhan
2017-01-04 22:55 ` Sowmini Varadhan
2017-01-04 23:26 ` Shuah Khan
2017-01-05 15:54 ` Sowmini Varadhan
2017-01-05 18:46 ` Shuah Khan
2017-01-04 18:45 ` [PATCH v3 net-next 2/2] tools: psock_tpacket: block Rx until socket filter has been added and socket has been bound to loopback Sowmini Varadhan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170104224848.GB31756@oracle.com \
--to=sowmini.varadhan@oracle.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=willemb@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.