From: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
To: "Jose E. Marchesi" <jose.marchesi@oracle.com>,
Dave Thaler <dthaler1968=40googlemail.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, bpf@ietf.org, Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Bpf] [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf, docs: Add callx instructions in new conformance group
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 13:49:23 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b5072dfb-ab2b-40eb-891e-630a02c58fe8@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87le7ptlsq.fsf@oracle.com>
On 2/12/24 1:28 PM, Jose E. Marchesi wrote:
>> +BPF_CALL 0x8 0x1 call PC += reg_val(imm) BPF_JMP | BPF_X only, see `Program-local functions`_
> If the instruction requires a register operand, why not using one of the
> register fields? Is there any reason for not doing that?
Talked to Alexei and we think using dst_reg for the register for callx
insn is better. I will craft a llvm patch for this today. Thanks!
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
To: "Jose E. Marchesi" <jose.marchesi@oracle.com>,
Dave Thaler <dthaler1968=40googlemail.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, bpf@ietf.org, Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Bpf] [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf, docs: Add callx instructions in new conformance group
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 13:49:23 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b5072dfb-ab2b-40eb-891e-630a02c58fe8@linux.dev> (raw)
Message-ID: <20240212214923.htfqlTXhuz_9NbCrXB9RsDY_YfRrZ3DEn1vdD0U2OZ8@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87le7ptlsq.fsf@oracle.com>
On 2/12/24 1:28 PM, Jose E. Marchesi wrote:
>> +BPF_CALL 0x8 0x1 call PC += reg_val(imm) BPF_JMP | BPF_X only, see `Program-local functions`_
> If the instruction requires a register operand, why not using one of the
> register fields? Is there any reason for not doing that?
Talked to Alexei and we think using dst_reg for the register for callx
insn is better. I will craft a llvm patch for this today. Thanks!
--
Bpf mailing list
Bpf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bpf
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-12 21:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-12 21:13 [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf, docs: Add callx instructions in new conformance group Dave Thaler
2024-02-12 21:13 ` [Bpf] " Dave Thaler
2024-02-12 21:21 ` David Vernet
2024-02-12 21:21 ` David Vernet
2024-02-12 21:28 ` Jose E. Marchesi
2024-02-12 21:28 ` Jose E. Marchesi
2024-02-12 21:46 ` dthaler1968
2024-02-12 21:46 ` dthaler1968=40googlemail.com
2024-02-12 21:49 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2024-02-12 21:49 ` Yonghong Song
2024-02-12 21:52 ` dthaler1968
2024-02-12 21:52 ` dthaler1968=40googlemail.com
2024-02-12 22:48 ` Yonghong Song
2024-02-12 22:48 ` Yonghong Song
2024-02-13 1:18 ` dthaler1968
2024-02-13 1:18 ` dthaler1968=40googlemail.com
2024-02-13 1:23 ` Yonghong Song
2024-02-13 1:23 ` Yonghong Song
2024-02-13 6:11 ` Jose E. Marchesi
2024-02-13 6:11 ` Jose E. Marchesi
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=b5072dfb-ab2b-40eb-891e-630a02c58fe8@linux.dev \
--to=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
--cc=bpf@ietf.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dthaler1968=40googlemail.com@dmarc.ietf.org \
--cc=dthaler1968@gmail.com \
--cc=jose.marchesi@oracle.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.