From: dthaler1968@googlemail.com
To: "'Aoyang Fang \(SSE, 222010547\)'" <aoyangfang@link.cuhk.edu.cn>,
<dthaler1968@googlemail.com>
Cc: <bpf@ietf.org>, <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] update the consistency issue in documentation
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2024 17:31:33 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <076801da3f76$eb0cdaf0$c12690d0$@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20654405-C500-4A24-B09E-A28B25DF32AC@link.cuhk.edu.cn>
Aoyang Fang (SSE, 222010547) <aoyangfang@link.cuhk.edu.cn> wrote:
> If so, the value of arithmetic instructions’ code should be 4 bit, rather than
> BPF_ADD: 0x00, BPF_SUB: 0x10, BPF_MUL: 0x20. Otherwise the convention of
> arithmetic instruction is not consistent with the convention of jump
> instructions.
Good point, you are right that section 3.1 (Arithmetic instructions) and 3.3 (Jump instructions)
are not consistent with each other. Since 'code' is defined in section 3 as a 4-bit field,
I agree that it would be more consistent to change section 3.1 rather than defining
8-bit values for a 4-bit field.
Dave
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: dthaler1968=40googlemail.com@dmarc.ietf.org
To: "'Aoyang Fang \(SSE, 222010547\)'" <aoyangfang@link.cuhk.edu.cn>,
<dthaler1968@googlemail.com>
Cc: <bpf@ietf.org>, <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Bpf] [PATCH] update the consistency issue in documentation
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2024 17:31:33 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <076801da3f76$eb0cdaf0$c12690d0$@gmail.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20240105013133.v6G2NYHB22V-BiY3Jf05VTQGN5c0D8wYwGC6Rnqx-Fk@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20654405-C500-4A24-B09E-A28B25DF32AC@link.cuhk.edu.cn>
Aoyang Fang (SSE, 222010547) <aoyangfang@link.cuhk.edu.cn> wrote:
> If so, the value of arithmetic instructions’ code should be 4 bit, rather than
> BPF_ADD: 0x00, BPF_SUB: 0x10, BPF_MUL: 0x20. Otherwise the convention of
> arithmetic instruction is not consistent with the convention of jump
> instructions.
Good point, you are right that section 3.1 (Arithmetic instructions) and 3.3 (Jump instructions)
are not consistent with each other. Since 'code' is defined in section 3 as a 4-bit field,
I agree that it would be more consistent to change section 3.1 rather than defining
8-bit values for a 4-bit field.
Dave
--
Bpf mailing list
Bpf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bpf
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-05 1:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-04 3:12 [PATCH] update the consistency issue in documentation Aoyang Fang (SSE, 222010547)
2024-01-04 3:12 ` [Bpf] " Aoyang Fang (SSE, 222010547)
2024-01-04 19:12 ` dthaler1968
2024-01-04 19:12 ` [Bpf] " dthaler1968=40googlemail.com
[not found] ` <20654405-C500-4A24-B09E-A28B25DF32AC@link.cuhk.edu.cn>
2024-01-05 1:31 ` dthaler1968 [this message]
2024-01-05 1:31 ` dthaler1968=40googlemail.com
[not found] <F349E672-63EB-4DA3-84F8-45E360E02594@link.cuhk.edu.cn>
2024-01-04 3:39 ` David Vernet
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='076801da3f76$eb0cdaf0$c12690d0$@gmail.com' \
--to=dthaler1968@googlemail.com \
--cc=aoyangfang@link.cuhk.edu.cn \
--cc=bpf@ietf.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
/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