From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: RFC: New BGF 'LOOP' instruction Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 22:13:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20100802.221341.137851732.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20100802110334.GK11110@cel.leo> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: leonerd@leonerd.org.uk Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:46576 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751189Ab0HCFNW (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Aug 2010 01:13:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100802110334.GK11110@cel.leo> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Paul LeoNerd Evans Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 12:03:34 +0100 > Any comments on this, while I proceed? Barring any major complaints, > I'll have a hack at some code and present a patch in due course... We're not adding loop instructions, it's just asking for trouble since any user can attach BPF filters to a socket and it's just way too easy to make a loop endless. There's a reason no loop primitives were added to the original BPF specification, perhaps you should take a look at what their reasoning was. It still applies now.