From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pf1-f176.google.com (mail-pf1-f176.google.com [209.85.210.176]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 653E310EB for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2024 01:18:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.176 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707787113; cv=none; b=KvL5/yt0ErrUFF75sH47NCdtmizNRU5SH7uAnPG2INJpgfIxumRuPfNdT5Bp/2YAySv7rHKnzKIOX9lk6uFwFdqPjZgBC8EMayE97P+8O+N1GtcsyLojFqMeakaVO7o7vA+YdHVxapWP1MY/u2ht3hhS11Xea338N+c7uDy91mI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707787113; c=relaxed/simple; bh=2nGoxm+WjZU6AVea51wZ3M/eN1iAEyQQ/ziXUflo/PA=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ATm3LCJXPz9k29l6uytK6H+E7zpmZluwuQvtW8/sJs5NOj28Hi2aAs2oMNJjJoo6vf5YSZUjWh205xpLULdQCT6gOD7SBsw8vorzo3Oev8D/a9bVMmQWc2OE/89eBtQCAfaOd3s1IJUXQZtuIg3qkRndDpAeFVe3qHmuUZmyL+c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=googlemail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=googlemail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=googlemail.com header.i=@googlemail.com header.b=eXB4vHiz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.176 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=googlemail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=googlemail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=googlemail.com header.i=@googlemail.com header.b="eXB4vHiz" Received: by mail-pf1-f176.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-6e0a479a6cbso1269446b3a.0 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:18:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20230601; t=1707787110; x=1708391910; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-language:thread-index:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version:message-id:date:subject:in-reply-to:references:cc:to :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=r/iL9hk9z65BlWcihXx6WQ/ZeCAECR3zF2bC+FtSh4c=; b=eXB4vHizo+QzdyaAXVIcGRyhf4KmdjZayNNw3RmT+Eg9R5NMHN555pFbxQdcdBfcrO VOgjYUnzykCrA4MB9dxQ4pu4jL2YoFX172wb78HRDCCZwp6yc9M8H78noMjUvTySt8cQ vNQK7KY7mceXjXoI4CRdLOAoTr/wi1FdOjQbCdJqampvuP0LwxEYrmlRwM8OIZrfm0oc 9Mu2E2TCnDvpt6ssuAm4gnew9XBbS82Y3+YfbQOmTPlzvVSQcB13KDPohmimkQBfX/AU K8wpJ2gLkuu2VLIERa4f9Rn/b7E85fBgf9AvtzCEix2akj6Iw71mnplwyvuSWQZVLDyt fmjA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1707787110; x=1708391910; h=content-language:thread-index:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version:message-id:date:subject:in-reply-to:references:cc:to :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=r/iL9hk9z65BlWcihXx6WQ/ZeCAECR3zF2bC+FtSh4c=; b=Pi9CQAHv3qrWvY/PK+MX+BZ7mUVKVsAib6xt85bH85XBtii++91yYS4pnkt47arfxQ KptIxZrCUexX0BA0hQ8Xqa+TDCJZDRvn3KARMUzc4ILVh4seWXQm+/o0wELAvvOAu4vj G4ARAauDHCJ/h/wIQ0HfYu4VTq0jFOK5OmmeNjiX6lxAmcFihdbQ18be3GvHT3DGfEQ2 JPHaAZdBLQ98+jMDkx/PEhggVnisWQ9TT8pL8ZRPLH9gJo1aCM0SRDZkJunsQj2Yn0Nk gxg+aQI+z7ZlFHdyRzCpsQSU6pSGakylv5gYLfhetiZxD4R9LwEPRWsmFdH6dSBX10Xa JhFg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwmkQbQunNZM2FHEbN7ol3909BxMyeeluhp0vxQOgZmSGmCwudO 05iUVRP3Hg2sO4sDLotkfi8/1ZhDUdSwBAeNduVmv7GzgX0/G1QzoeDKdMjmr+s= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHsjdMXpUH31e+aKErlxkbLoYrBL9hMng63nigj5d/ZtUOaFvXsf00AfWfVTcPMeEzG/buJEQ== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:8557:0:b0:6d9:b941:dbf5 with SMTP id y23-20020aa78557000000b006d9b941dbf5mr7120874pfn.11.1707787110538; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:18:30 -0800 (PST) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCV6siuus/c8HjoUW/4yK2KePDSVjB+bW40vpXQ6kB16ljjH1qBwaPmH1EvkBRsL7UoX/0xMsnHf4eRVnm+d/oL075MV+Z+SL/Fbop/WriCIV1m1vEgrMw== Received: from ArmidaleLaptop (c-67-170-74-237.hsd1.wa.comcast.net. [67.170.74.237]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b18-20020aa78712000000b006dfbecb5027sm6341097pfo.171.2024.02.12.17.18.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:18:30 -0800 (PST) From: dthaler1968@googlemail.com X-Google-Original-From: To: "'Yonghong Song'" , "'Jose E. Marchesi'" Cc: , References: <20240212211310.8282-1-dthaler1968@gmail.com> <87le7ptlsq.fsf@oracle.com> <036301da5dfd$be7d1b30$3b775190$@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [Bpf] [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf, docs: Add callx instructions in new conformance group Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:18:27 -0800 Message-ID: <03a801da5e1a$8d0274c0$a7075e40$@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AQKk5nBwvPPKgL8m8zzpY/2G4YK4bQLYE4TWAif8DTYBtYA5rwFjf1HurzGcgzA= Content-Language: en-us > -----Original Message----- > From: Yonghong Song > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 2:49 PM > To: dthaler1968@googlemail.com; 'Jose E. Marchesi' > ; 'Dave Thaler' > > Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org; bpf@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Bpf] [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf, docs: Add callx = instructions in new > conformance group >=20 >=20 > On 2/12/24 1:52 PM, dthaler1968@googlemail.com wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Yonghong Song > >> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 1:49 PM > >> To: Jose E. Marchesi ; Dave Thaler > >> > >> Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org; bpf@ietf.org; Dave Thaler > >> > >> Subject: Re: [Bpf] [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf, docs: Add callx > >> instructions in new conformance group > >> > >> > >> On 2/12/24 1:28 PM, Jose E. Marchesi wrote: > >>>> +BPF_CALL 0x8 0x1 call PC +=3D 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! > > Why dst_reg instead of src_reg? > > BPF_X is supposed to mean use src_reg. >=20 > Let us use dst_reg. Currently, for BPF_K, we have src_reg for a bunch = of flags > (pseudo call, kfunc call, etc.). So for BPF_X, let us preserve this = property as > well in case in the future we will introduce variants for callx. Ah yes, that makes sense. > The following is the llvm diff: >=20 > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81546 Which llvm release is it targeted for? 18.1.0-rc3? 18.1.1? later? > > But this thread is about reserving/documenting the existing = practice, > > since anyone trying to use it would run into interop issues because > > of existing clang. Should we document both and list one as = deprecated? >=20 > I think just documenting the new encoding is good enough. But other > people can chime in just in case that I missed something. Ok. Dave From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.ietf.org (mail.ietf.org [50.223.129.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6428B1385 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2024 01:19:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=50.223.129.194 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707787168; cv=none; b=esUWJoRJc1iho8LRe2sfhtaCcF27/Ms0b11H0h63GW7rDzLwZdrkwDbqTuA9/5+88+T3RKeJdgLzBCScFhcSq571CT3x5B4tTt6n1WP9aSez7pNpokCHvOD7FMTZ0BsFYLp0K8jCxe7TG1kyD7ywF5hINnY5Xp0U+zIseqLuMVI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707787168; c=relaxed/simple; bh=AmfdaYtNSWyR3zI0pWTdqZifAexTYNFzvaFM8zWMc/k=; h=To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Subject: Content-Type:From; b=mVm28rDJ8JVgqYLooum6Ukz86nsl7GFTsvMycA/U7IUumyHXr+TtDOBgRCgesOjQhiWU+DmB//YystDVAf9sBy1rTuICsAU4IUMtOtSUtV3TH0V5KzNb3vCiEY5zNI+woE6rUSho0051kqUHAKyNKqHDC3ef4CwOxPL0BPV0D8c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=dmarc.ietf.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ietf.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ietf.org header.i=@ietf.org header.b=FVKp/Pu6; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) header.d=ietf.org header.i=@ietf.org header.b=b3dtH/Ps reason="signature verification failed"; dkim=fail (2048-bit key) header.d=googlemail.com header.i=@googlemail.com header.b=IMcaxr2K reason="signature verification failed"; arc=none smtp.client-ip=50.223.129.194 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=dmarc.ietf.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ietf.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ietf.org header.i=@ietf.org header.b="FVKp/Pu6"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=ietf.org header.i=@ietf.org header.b="b3dtH/Ps"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=googlemail.com header.i=@googlemail.com header.b="IMcaxr2K" Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBC0FC19ECBB for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:18:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1707787134; bh=AmfdaYtNSWyR3zI0pWTdqZifAexTYNFzvaFM8zWMc/k=; h=To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=FVKp/Pu6ZiJThPxP61WvKZRPZqvpbL6slw4Gh1bhHrGbsHvXCdGGEJ/nNBglMitfV x/1muOdDHUq88Lf6qogzUfgwjITuVzxExwHkuRIkmYZvHLFmVykGUDgSAzkc3RBvZ5 JrtBuM1jXQWfkg+GhVlSFQjppOlc4xdNG/EInWUM= Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA4B5C18DB92; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:18:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1707787134; bh=AmfdaYtNSWyR3zI0pWTdqZifAexTYNFzvaFM8zWMc/k=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe; b=b3dtH/PsIuS4y5LdTIVdMFA+qtQwUXE0DF+daI2XlZDIzjOoZ9wTPccZlsjtP68oB CrikWky7OPaB76oVNkrJ8zyBV2soV29As5ro2Mt2JCi/eapweh97kjYizi6Nf8tg9v UoRePeAyu2Ojn3ObzlJXqQkPtnPcXZ6tC6wjpAF0= Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D65C0C18DB92 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:18:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.855 X-Spam-Level: Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=googlemail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S8tetiKY2a4F for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:18:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pf1-x42d.google.com (mail-pf1-x42d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6532EC18DB89 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:18:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pf1-x42d.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-6da6b0eb2d4so2755067b3a.1 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:18:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20230601; t=1707787110; x=1708391910; darn=ietf.org; h=content-language:thread-index:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version:message-id:date:subject:in-reply-to:references:cc:to :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=r/iL9hk9z65BlWcihXx6WQ/ZeCAECR3zF2bC+FtSh4c=; b=IMcaxr2KH/PozPfIrT1R/VAvwtoAEBa2vOeceXgeoRK6oGWozKa0rZSbrGr/7uHpoR B4t1bfylaN7BGvKxL0l3vqIv3uMH1KVN5nGyW3AoKkNc9gLR+ZzPuYd558u6P90VDHcA C0w8Z55JyXtPm3INKYJvG5eUbC8idTgti7fxUwRWBqC6+8Ad+wbChPro4qtSNha4ARaf kliCfDoAv4PoBOrmG7N1tPfw9bkdvD5qa0G7DNBeZRppJVWHDI/ntPGQiYUrr2QcDtoy QWamSOVE6wqtRCFQK4vmVfHMY4nhoQnpRmUwVWAZwBhyXGJQ6uMXiGZ6XPG0I8lEoBQT 5CNQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1707787110; x=1708391910; h=content-language:thread-index:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version:message-id:date:subject:in-reply-to:references:cc:to :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=r/iL9hk9z65BlWcihXx6WQ/ZeCAECR3zF2bC+FtSh4c=; b=wddgwHYWPDfIl6o23J5AGOeSGZ7DVGabgGnOQVkAKd8Cv+ETBeXK4HE3clG+DeZS9B wfGIhJowT6Qc7R2Ycc9Mf7o2ZoaHR07RnmOQRhpvnkv0uczczzBWA7qfTBqgtGir2XvX 7NKdbsttkcEgsitUNcUc/WulkaPmyBtsyVmr5b7LSJWcmDUTTWiZqyssDKBHUuFF3mrB nOT0ZttR6VLGu/JsrP+IYXqeA/G7YDQRZrWfNgBYRRUxfhOSP3GYrqXmxt0/TJUOX7Im KB5NgFmgDCctaqmZdthC/XDni9EyTStOTScGcr5/HOInc6KNFtlnNioexRGSjkB/3u12 /mvA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCU/yRv2iXtT55Qg3KZyqNf3J5FR6CYKRItBMuAmjbKVQ+9KJvU1Hkcnelg7CjcQuBMiehykNS/ksw3d6VM= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz1jpBo9SW/R0/1FFGx8dSzz4n4LOJ8xFZpQ9D3vWjym+rSGiao W0akGu4TPariShiJqNqGkIjHx9dg+WLemXh+PEVIIoCh4dG5QCp6k0RavFM6QoU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHsjdMXpUH31e+aKErlxkbLoYrBL9hMng63nigj5d/ZtUOaFvXsf00AfWfVTcPMeEzG/buJEQ== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:8557:0:b0:6d9:b941:dbf5 with SMTP id y23-20020aa78557000000b006d9b941dbf5mr7120874pfn.11.1707787110538; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:18:30 -0800 (PST) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCV6siuus/c8HjoUW/4yK2KePDSVjB+bW40vpXQ6kB16ljjH1qBwaPmH1EvkBRsL7UoX/0xMsnHf4eRVnm+d/oL075MV+Z+SL/Fbop/WriCIV1m1vEgrMw== Received: from ArmidaleLaptop (c-67-170-74-237.hsd1.wa.comcast.net. [67.170.74.237]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b18-20020aa78712000000b006dfbecb5027sm6341097pfo.171.2024.02.12.17.18.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:18:30 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Original-From: To: "'Yonghong Song'" , "'Jose E. Marchesi'" Cc: , References: <20240212211310.8282-1-dthaler1968@gmail.com> <87le7ptlsq.fsf@oracle.com> <036301da5dfd$be7d1b30$3b775190$@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:18:27 -0800 Message-ID: <03a801da5e1a$8d0274c0$a7075e40$@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AQKk5nBwvPPKgL8m8zzpY/2G4YK4bQLYE4TWAif8DTYBtYA5rwFjf1HurzGcgzA= Content-Language: en-us Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Bpf] [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf, docs: Add callx instructions in new conformance group X-BeenThere: bpf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: bpf-bounces@ietf.org Sender: "Bpf" X-Original-From: dthaler1968@googlemail.com From: dthaler1968=40googlemail.com@dmarc.ietf.org Message-ID: <20240213011827.8APSdxXZ0rUU8SVPbzHe0G6iy2Av6770SyDvtsNZcsk@z> > -----Original Message----- > From: Yonghong Song > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 2:49 PM > To: dthaler1968@googlemail.com; 'Jose E. Marchesi' > ; 'Dave Thaler' > > Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org; bpf@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Bpf] [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf, docs: Add callx instructions in new > conformance group > > > On 2/12/24 1:52 PM, dthaler1968@googlemail.com wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Yonghong Song > >> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 1:49 PM > >> To: Jose E. Marchesi ; Dave Thaler > >> > >> Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org; bpf@ietf.org; Dave Thaler > >> > >> Subject: Re: [Bpf] [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf, docs: Add callx > >> instructions in new conformance group > >> > >> > >> 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! > > Why dst_reg instead of src_reg? > > BPF_X is supposed to mean use src_reg. > > Let us use dst_reg. Currently, for BPF_K, we have src_reg for a bunch of flags > (pseudo call, kfunc call, etc.). So for BPF_X, let us preserve this property as > well in case in the future we will introduce variants for callx. Ah yes, that makes sense. > The following is the llvm diff: > > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81546 Which llvm release is it targeted for? 18.1.0-rc3? 18.1.1? later? > > But this thread is about reserving/documenting the existing practice, > > since anyone trying to use it would run into interop issues because > > of existing clang. Should we document both and list one as deprecated? > > I think just documenting the new encoding is good enough. But other > people can chime in just in case that I missed something. Ok. Dave -- Bpf mailing list Bpf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bpf