From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel-FeC+5ew28dpmcu3hnIyYJQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast-uqk4Ao+rVK5Wk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Thomas Graf <tgraf-G/eBtMaohhA@public.gmane.org>,
linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/2] bpf: allow extended BPF programs access skb fields
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 00:51:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5504C989.8000800@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <550459E4.1050808-uqk4Ao+rVK5Wk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
On 03/14/2015 04:55 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
...
> so from there I saw two options: either copy paste all
> build_bug_on and have the same *insn=... and build_bug_on in
> two places or consolidate them in single helper function.
> Obviously single helper function is a preferred method.
> I'm not sure what are you still arguing about.
I'm repeating myself here, but fair enough. To me the v1
code in sk_filter_convert_ctx_access() was more sound. So
taking out the ifindex issue, that's 4 BUILD_BUG_ON()s in
addition.
I actually think the current filter code is in a reasonable
shape. convert_bpf_extensions() is full of BPF to eBPF
conversions, so going over convert_bpf_extensions() some of
them would now use convert_skb_access(), some other ``skb
accesses''use macros directly in place, the reading-flow of
this code now is inconsistent to me and it would have been
more sound if that's just left as is in convert_bpf_extensions().
I'm all for consolidating code, don't get me wrong, but I
think this exception would be better for above sake. That's
all I'm trying to say. I understand you're of exact opposite
opinion, so I guess it's pointless for me to comment any
further on this.
Thanks,
Daniel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/2] bpf: allow extended BPF programs access skb fields
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 00:51:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5504C989.8000800@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <550459E4.1050808@plumgrid.com>
On 03/14/2015 04:55 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
...
> so from there I saw two options: either copy paste all
> build_bug_on and have the same *insn=... and build_bug_on in
> two places or consolidate them in single helper function.
> Obviously single helper function is a preferred method.
> I'm not sure what are you still arguing about.
I'm repeating myself here, but fair enough. To me the v1
code in sk_filter_convert_ctx_access() was more sound. So
taking out the ifindex issue, that's 4 BUILD_BUG_ON()s in
addition.
I actually think the current filter code is in a reasonable
shape. convert_bpf_extensions() is full of BPF to eBPF
conversions, so going over convert_bpf_extensions() some of
them would now use convert_skb_access(), some other ``skb
accesses''use macros directly in place, the reading-flow of
this code now is inconsistent to me and it would have been
more sound if that's just left as is in convert_bpf_extensions().
I'm all for consolidating code, don't get me wrong, but I
think this exception would be better for above sake. That's
all I'm trying to say. I understand you're of exact opposite
opinion, so I guess it's pointless for me to comment any
further on this.
Thanks,
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-14 23:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-13 18:57 [PATCH v2 net-next 0/2] bpf: allow eBPF access skb fields Alexei Starovoitov
2015-03-13 18:57 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2015-03-13 18:57 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 1/2] bpf: allow extended BPF programs " Alexei Starovoitov
[not found] ` <1426273064-4837-2-git-send-email-ast-uqk4Ao+rVK5Wk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
2015-03-14 1:46 ` Daniel Borkmann
2015-03-14 1:46 ` Daniel Borkmann
[not found] ` <550392F7.9040308-FeC+5ew28dpmcu3hnIyYJQ@public.gmane.org>
2015-03-14 2:06 ` Daniel Borkmann
2015-03-14 2:06 ` Daniel Borkmann
2015-03-14 2:08 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2015-03-14 2:16 ` Daniel Borkmann
[not found] ` <55039A0D.20000-FeC+5ew28dpmcu3hnIyYJQ@public.gmane.org>
2015-03-14 2:27 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2015-03-14 2:27 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2015-03-14 4:59 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2015-03-14 9:35 ` Daniel Borkmann
[not found] ` <550400D8.5060407-FeC+5ew28dpmcu3hnIyYJQ@public.gmane.org>
2015-03-14 15:55 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2015-03-14 15:55 ` Alexei Starovoitov
[not found] ` <550459E4.1050808-uqk4Ao+rVK5Wk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
2015-03-14 23:51 ` Daniel Borkmann [this message]
2015-03-14 23:51 ` Daniel Borkmann
2015-03-15 2:02 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2015-03-14 2:07 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2015-03-13 18:57 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 2/2] samples: bpf: add skb->field examples and tests Alexei Starovoitov
[not found] ` <1426273064-4837-1-git-send-email-ast-uqk4Ao+rVK5Wk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
2015-03-16 2:03 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 0/2] bpf: allow eBPF access skb fields David Miller
2015-03-16 2:03 ` David Miller
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=5504C989.8000800@iogearbox.net \
--to=daniel-fec+5ew28dpmcu3hniyyjq@public.gmane.org \
--cc=ast-uqk4Ao+rVK5Wk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=tgraf-G/eBtMaohhA@public.gmane.org \
/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.