From: Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@gmail.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
"Fijalkowski, Maciej" <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>,
Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>,
Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>,
Hengqi Chen <hengqi.chen@gmail.com>,
kernel-patches-bot@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] bpf, x64: Fix tailcall hierarchy
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 22:42:47 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0574436a-0c2a-4089-9bd5-2ee4e0b39f71@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAADnVQJopb=p-w-RtrDPfNUePjtOO1QtMDEq0DW3nbG7nPL7wQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 2024/2/21 01:33, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 5:43 AM Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Finally, here's the diff against latest bpf-next with asm to handle
>> percpu tail_call_cnt:
>
> It is not against bpf-next.
>
>> /* Number of bytes that will be skipped on tailcall */
>> -#define X86_TAIL_CALL_OFFSET (22 + ENDBR_INSN_SIZE)
>
> There is no such thing in bpf-next.
>
> Please make a proper patch post following the rules in
> Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst
Sorry for my misunderstanding. I will send PATCH v2 instead, which is
against bpf-next truly.
I'll read the doc again to do better in the future.
Thanks,
Leon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-21 14:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-04 14:22 [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] bpf, x64: Fix tailcall hierarchy Leon Hwang
2024-01-04 14:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/4] bpf, x64: Use emit_nops() to replace memcpy()'ing x86_nops[5] Leon Hwang
2024-01-04 14:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] bpf, x64: Fix tailcall hierarchy Leon Hwang
2024-01-05 4:15 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-01-05 6:15 ` Leon Hwang
2024-01-05 17:43 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-01-06 2:38 ` Leon Hwang
2024-01-05 10:33 ` Leon Hwang
2024-01-05 17:47 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-01-06 2:33 ` Leon Hwang
2024-01-06 3:34 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-01-05 12:40 ` Jiri Olsa
2024-01-06 0:18 ` John Fastabend
2024-01-06 3:46 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-02-14 5:47 ` Leon Hwang
2024-02-14 11:25 ` Maciej Fijalkowski
2024-02-14 16:31 ` Leon Hwang
2024-02-14 23:16 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-02-15 13:16 ` Leon Hwang
2024-02-16 2:18 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-02-17 13:43 ` Leon Hwang
2024-02-20 5:13 ` Leon Hwang
2024-02-20 17:34 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-02-20 17:33 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-02-21 14:42 ` Leon Hwang [this message]
2024-01-04 14:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] bpf, x64: Rename RESTORE_TAIL_CALL_CNT() to LOAD_TAIL_CALL_CNT_PTR() Leon Hwang
2024-01-04 14:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] selftests/bpf: Add testcases for tailcall hierarchy fixing Leon Hwang
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=0574436a-0c2a-4089-9bd5-2ee4e0b39f71@gmail.com \
--to=hffilwlqm@gmail.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=hengqi.chen@gmail.com \
--cc=iii@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jakub@cloudflare.com \
--cc=kernel-patches-bot@fb.com \
--cc=maciej.fijalkowski@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox