* [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, docs: specify which BPF_ABS and BPF_IND fields were zero
@ 2024-02-21 17:54 Dave Thaler
2024-02-21 17:54 ` [Bpf] " Dave Thaler
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Dave Thaler @ 2024-02-21 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bpf; +Cc: bpf, Dave Thaler
Specifying which fields were unused allows IANA to only list as deprecated
instructions that were actually used, leaving the rest as unassigned and
possibly available for future use for something else.
Signed-off-by: Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@gmail.com>
---
Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst b/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
index 868d9f617..597a086c8 100644
--- a/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
+++ b/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
@@ -658,6 +658,7 @@ Legacy BPF Packet access instructions
BPF previously introduced special instructions for access to packet data that were
carried over from classic BPF. These instructions used an instruction
class of BPF_LD, a size modifier of BPF_W, BPF_H, or BPF_B, and a
-mode modifier of BPF_ABS or BPF_IND. However, these instructions are
+mode modifier of BPF_ABS or BPF_IND. The 'dst_reg' and 'offset' fields were
+set to zero, and 'src_reg' was set to zero for BPF_ABS. However, these instructions are
deprecated and should no longer be used. All legacy packet access
instructions belong to the "legacy" conformance group.
--
2.40.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* [Bpf] [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, docs: specify which BPF_ABS and BPF_IND fields were zero
2024-02-21 17:54 [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, docs: specify which BPF_ABS and BPF_IND fields were zero Dave Thaler
@ 2024-02-21 17:54 ` Dave Thaler
2024-02-21 18:03 ` David Vernet
2024-02-22 17:20 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Dave Thaler @ 2024-02-21 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bpf; +Cc: bpf, Dave Thaler
Specifying which fields were unused allows IANA to only list as deprecated
instructions that were actually used, leaving the rest as unassigned and
possibly available for future use for something else.
Signed-off-by: Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@gmail.com>
---
Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst b/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
index 868d9f617..597a086c8 100644
--- a/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
+++ b/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
@@ -658,6 +658,7 @@ Legacy BPF Packet access instructions
BPF previously introduced special instructions for access to packet data that were
carried over from classic BPF. These instructions used an instruction
class of BPF_LD, a size modifier of BPF_W, BPF_H, or BPF_B, and a
-mode modifier of BPF_ABS or BPF_IND. However, these instructions are
+mode modifier of BPF_ABS or BPF_IND. The 'dst_reg' and 'offset' fields were
+set to zero, and 'src_reg' was set to zero for BPF_ABS. However, these instructions are
deprecated and should no longer be used. All legacy packet access
instructions belong to the "legacy" conformance group.
--
2.40.1
--
Bpf mailing list
Bpf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bpf
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, docs: specify which BPF_ABS and BPF_IND fields were zero
2024-02-21 17:54 [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, docs: specify which BPF_ABS and BPF_IND fields were zero Dave Thaler
2024-02-21 17:54 ` [Bpf] " Dave Thaler
@ 2024-02-21 18:03 ` David Vernet
2024-02-21 18:03 ` [Bpf] " David Vernet
2024-02-22 17:20 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: David Vernet @ 2024-02-21 18:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Thaler; +Cc: bpf, bpf, Dave Thaler
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1599 bytes --]
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 09:54:19AM -0800, Dave Thaler wrote:
> Specifying which fields were unused allows IANA to only list as deprecated
> instructions that were actually used, leaving the rest as unassigned and
> possibly available for future use for something else.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@gmail.com>
Seems reasonable -- guess there's no harm in leaving ourselves the
option of using them in the future.
Acked-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
> ---
> Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst b/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
> index 868d9f617..597a086c8 100644
> --- a/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
> @@ -658,6 +658,7 @@ Legacy BPF Packet access instructions
> BPF previously introduced special instructions for access to packet data that were
> carried over from classic BPF. These instructions used an instruction
> class of BPF_LD, a size modifier of BPF_W, BPF_H, or BPF_B, and a
> -mode modifier of BPF_ABS or BPF_IND. However, these instructions are
> +mode modifier of BPF_ABS or BPF_IND. The 'dst_reg' and 'offset' fields were
> +set to zero, and 'src_reg' was set to zero for BPF_ABS. However, these instructions are
> deprecated and should no longer be used. All legacy packet access
> instructions belong to the "legacy" conformance group.
> --
> 2.40.1
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bpf] [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, docs: specify which BPF_ABS and BPF_IND fields were zero
2024-02-21 18:03 ` David Vernet
@ 2024-02-21 18:03 ` David Vernet
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: David Vernet @ 2024-02-21 18:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Thaler; +Cc: bpf, bpf, Dave Thaler
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1599 bytes --]
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 09:54:19AM -0800, Dave Thaler wrote:
> Specifying which fields were unused allows IANA to only list as deprecated
> instructions that were actually used, leaving the rest as unassigned and
> possibly available for future use for something else.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@gmail.com>
Seems reasonable -- guess there's no harm in leaving ourselves the
option of using them in the future.
Acked-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
> ---
> Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst b/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
> index 868d9f617..597a086c8 100644
> --- a/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
> @@ -658,6 +658,7 @@ Legacy BPF Packet access instructions
> BPF previously introduced special instructions for access to packet data that were
> carried over from classic BPF. These instructions used an instruction
> class of BPF_LD, a size modifier of BPF_W, BPF_H, or BPF_B, and a
> -mode modifier of BPF_ABS or BPF_IND. However, these instructions are
> +mode modifier of BPF_ABS or BPF_IND. The 'dst_reg' and 'offset' fields were
> +set to zero, and 'src_reg' was set to zero for BPF_ABS. However, these instructions are
> deprecated and should no longer be used. All legacy packet access
> instructions belong to the "legacy" conformance group.
> --
> 2.40.1
>
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 76 bytes --]
--
Bpf mailing list
Bpf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bpf
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, docs: specify which BPF_ABS and BPF_IND fields were zero
2024-02-21 17:54 [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, docs: specify which BPF_ABS and BPF_IND fields were zero Dave Thaler
2024-02-21 17:54 ` [Bpf] " Dave Thaler
2024-02-21 18:03 ` David Vernet
@ 2024-02-22 17:20 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: patchwork-bot+netdevbpf @ 2024-02-22 17:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Thaler; +Cc: bpf, bpf, dthaler1968
Hello:
This patch was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (master)
by Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>:
On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 09:54:19 -0800 you wrote:
> Specifying which fields were unused allows IANA to only list as deprecated
> instructions that were actually used, leaving the rest as unassigned and
> possibly available for future use for something else.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@gmail.com>
> ---
> Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Here is the summary with links:
- [bpf-next] bpf, docs: specify which BPF_ABS and BPF_IND fields were zero
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/89ee838130f4
You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-02-22 17:20 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-02-21 17:54 [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, docs: specify which BPF_ABS and BPF_IND fields were zero Dave Thaler
2024-02-21 17:54 ` [Bpf] " Dave Thaler
2024-02-21 18:03 ` David Vernet
2024-02-21 18:03 ` [Bpf] " David Vernet
2024-02-22 17:20 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox