From: Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@googlemail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: bpf@ietf.org, Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@gmail.com>,
Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@googlemail.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf, docs: Clarify PC use in instruction-set.rst
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 13:18:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240426201828.4365-1-dthaler1968@gmail.com> (raw)
This patch elaborates on the use of PC by expanding the PC acronym,
explaining the units, and the relative position to which the offset
applies.
v1->v2: reword per feedback from Alexei
Signed-off-by: Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@googlemail.com>
---
Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst b/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
index b44bdacd0..766f57636 100644
--- a/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
+++ b/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
@@ -469,6 +469,12 @@ JSLT 0xc any PC += offset if dst < src signed
JSLE 0xd any PC += offset if dst <= src signed
======== ===== ======= ================================= ===================================================
+where 'PC' denotes the program counter, and the offset to increment by
+is in units of 64-bit instructions relative to the instruction following
+the jump instruction. Thus 'PC += 1' skips execution of the next
+instruction if it's a basic instruction and fails verification if the
+next instruction is a 128-bit wide instruction.
+
The BPF program needs to store the return value into register R0 before doing an
``EXIT``.
--
2.40.1
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Thaler <dthaler1968=40googlemail.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: bpf@ietf.org, Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@gmail.com>,
Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@googlemail.com>
Subject: [Bpf] [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf, docs: Clarify PC use in instruction-set.rst
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 13:18:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240426201828.4365-1-dthaler1968@gmail.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20240426201828.-h1wVHOmZGfoG-VjGSCEVeiOosVXbYmTC8MoptjntC8@z> (raw)
This patch elaborates on the use of PC by expanding the PC acronym,
explaining the units, and the relative position to which the offset
applies.
v1->v2: reword per feedback from Alexei
Signed-off-by: Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@googlemail.com>
---
Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst b/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
index b44bdacd0..766f57636 100644
--- a/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
+++ b/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
@@ -469,6 +469,12 @@ JSLT 0xc any PC += offset if dst < src signed
JSLE 0xd any PC += offset if dst <= src signed
======== ===== ======= ================================= ===================================================
+where 'PC' denotes the program counter, and the offset to increment by
+is in units of 64-bit instructions relative to the instruction following
+the jump instruction. Thus 'PC += 1' skips execution of the next
+instruction if it's a basic instruction and fails verification if the
+next instruction is a 128-bit wide instruction.
+
The BPF program needs to store the return value into register R0 before doing an
``EXIT``.
--
2.40.1
--
Bpf mailing list
Bpf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bpf
next reply other threads:[~2024-04-26 20:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-26 20:18 Dave Thaler [this message]
2024-04-26 20:18 ` [Bpf] [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf, docs: Clarify PC use in instruction-set.rst Dave Thaler
2024-04-26 20:58 ` David Vernet
2024-04-26 20:58 ` 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=20240426201828.4365-1-dthaler1968@gmail.com \
--to=dthaler1968@googlemail.com \
--cc=bpf@ietf.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dthaler1968@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).