From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-oo1-f50.google.com (mail-oo1-f50.google.com [209.85.161.50]) (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 E96633D393 for ; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 14:42:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.161.50 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708526577; cv=none; b=Kekse0ym6IS/ccUdKwcT6ZRg6tWvkK74ZjqTB0ygSKbxoSUIrbDYZsI6NwiTzxOsL9lsfGfm6mDyKfnnIzX/OjfooEXkpWFoAD8R86y2ELPx2J7+9y/KJSk+MSg8G30ycaOdj5/4J6+orrh4aif87QypR9u7kc89HOBgB8C7nRw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708526577; c=relaxed/simple; bh=43bVyiWplXFt2wbJc+Gf9Zw4l8JmofgfevesSNZ22Ug=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=oihs2S9vNOkA3Ac2iIXVVAod1oe55uSUyckDquNUSUQuZ4T7Drisy0Jzwu+TTRtYAdI/knvFtJlvmhZhujd5TmtaMzbP7uUJB/OXHWlwvl1d1TmAvX8A/2W08WN2W1ywmlj+x+viwEOB9NiTJdR6t2tCcF6sNsLLoS1R2xH12v8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=C4TnO35y; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.161.50 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="C4TnO35y" Received: by mail-oo1-f50.google.com with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-58e256505f7so4601508eaf.3 for ; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 06:42:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1708526575; x=1709131375; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=NkdXG6Lod3iIh4Xwkw1Ln7sgM48ZShVJhAl82V9nYjE=; b=C4TnO35ygU9wns7Rm70m5PN3e89flQGMbZ+CS48MUWPw3i6qPNW2Xj3EgJwKZDq9w5 /DEytVb/K8ffxmiZWuTOuFJYs499mi+ovK4CMkqBPxzB0TCvxjxc41Uq8Sz32+fvBm6v 9XAL6VmyjpWUAkIpj5SIJzTss09xg9a3/LFp2/tiGzW8W+ULlu0+91Rvp8B0EcHwGUqm bPkrqzeZ/mjPtdZmZnxwSVHF3YLHJHp9CiwGACz+E2NWGk3CjN/BXdEjVXCOipX0h4xl 3XeBbv9XsXSjGbyd0JM88csreSdVbL2IDCnCG/TqEwUEDUXdfvsC+HCs4MM4L2jiSKa1 wOpw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1708526575; x=1709131375; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=NkdXG6Lod3iIh4Xwkw1Ln7sgM48ZShVJhAl82V9nYjE=; b=HAVS12MpXHiN4LvrqBLlhn/QRNckHtxKjQHfRaJzQBYq3wCd45CWYXKdgbB1nPfQOR kTe6NvJi2svknHdX/WLyoeRfVNOqTByQzka4dTJLGp45Fq15wQ0Ow2YLaVUvuHBbgYKn uDIPiiIH4vSon1j9pDiLuNIYMnoZcjBnuoUL9taKoxLVxc0mZmXm/OQnuGw37NV9yshi Qwvqszp4H/tKhQxKVmsy58ObP+he1/AzHVFYoR8YxegX+XBBVSMDasHDG9JiMG2S8BL3 HjWNRcISsBP7dBYGgAX9F3BZWj33bzEDWZ/SuRNXmtjfEvRv9KEFbUYcKEEYpA9kE0/l TIWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzltKsYNtI7FJfOjEUZHkitmONDgN8EmoiUxTRVJZjLTaPkqOkR Xt9HgpUKG5W/jGgb5Fjv5kx3CPLlugOe5BErSRfbMTgbAD71VikH X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH6DLTtzhXyXnrCcXsZ851t9b2sicQzuMlEPh4RRhx1NS4M4hNvmTatjHfgY5OTBcqlDUUl5A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6358:120b:b0:17b:5759:82ea with SMTP id h11-20020a056358120b00b0017b575982eamr2731721rwi.11.1708526574773; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 06:42:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.11.213] (220-136-196-149.dynamic-ip.hinet.net. [220.136.196.149]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h17-20020a63e151000000b005dc884e9f5bsm8688668pgk.38.2024.02.21.06.42.51 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 21 Feb 2024 06:42:54 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <0574436a-0c2a-4089-9bd5-2ee4e0b39f71@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 22:42:47 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] bpf, x64: Fix tailcall hierarchy Content-Language: en-US To: Alexei Starovoitov Cc: bpf , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , "Fijalkowski, Maciej" , Jakub Sitnicki , Ilya Leoshkevich , Hengqi Chen , kernel-patches-bot@fb.com References: <20240104142226.87869-1-hffilwlqm@gmail.com> <20240104142226.87869-3-hffilwlqm@gmail.com> <7af3f9c6-d25a-4ca5-9e15-c1699adcf7ab@gmail.com> <81607ab3-a7f5-4ad1-98c2-771c73bfb55c@gmail.com> <98557e73-1fdf-453d-b5d0-7d0e2b471a8b@gmail.com> From: Leon Hwang In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 2024/2/21 01:33, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 5:43 AM Leon Hwang 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