All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
To: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@oracle.com>
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, 04 Jan 2017 23:59:54 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <586D7E6A.5080009@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170104224848.GB31756@oracle.com>

On 01/04/2017 11:48 PM, Sowmini Varadhan wrote:
> 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.

I think we're talking past each other (?), my suggestion
from my original email was to use bpf_asm and paste the
(human readable) program as a comment above as done also
elsewhere. But just leave it as it is then, no big deal
either.

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-04 23:20 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
2017-01-04 22:59           ` Daniel Borkmann [this message]
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=586D7E6A.5080009@iogearbox.net \
    --to=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=sowmini.varadhan@oracle.com \
    --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.