From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 net-next 0/2] load imm64 insn and uapi/linux/bpf.h Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 10:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20140909.103059.1330265085939107782.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1409894238-9055-1-git-send-email-ast@plumgrid.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mingo-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, torvalds-hQyY1W1yCW8ekmWlsbkhG0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, luto-kltTT9wpgjJwATOyAt5JVQ@public.gmane.org, rostedt-nx8X9YLhiw1AfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org, dborkman-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, hannes-tFNcAqjVMyqKXQKiL6tip0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, chema-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, edumazet-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, a.p.zijlstra-/NLkJaSkS4VmR6Xm/wNWPw@public.gmane.org, hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, akpm-hQyY1W1yCW8ekmWlsbkhG0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, keescook-F7+t8E8rja9g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org, linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: ast-uqk4Ao+rVK5Wk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1409894238-9055-1-git-send-email-ast-uqk4Ao+rVK5Wk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org From: Alexei Starovoitov Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 22:17:16 -0700 > V9->V10 > - no changes, added Daniel's ack > > Note they're on top of Hannes's patch in the same area [1] > > V8 thread with 'why' reasoning and end goal [2] > > Original set [3] of ~28 patches I'm planning to present in 4 stages: > > I. this 2 patches to fork off llvm upstreaming > II. bpf syscall with manpage and map implementation > III. bpf program load/unload with verifier testsuite (1st user of > instruction macros from bpf.h and 1st user of load imm64 insn) > IV. tracing, etc > > [1] http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/385266/ > [2] https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/27/628 > [3] https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/26/859 Begrudgingly, I've applied this series. Although I really wish you had included the mechanism for userland to use the eBPF instructions alongside exporting them to userspace. You kept saying "LLVM is the user" but that's a bullshit argument because you aren't including the patches necessary to actually propagate native eBPF programs into the kernel. That's what, 1 or 2 patches, right? Which is not an unreasonable request. Anyways, I'm just extremely frustrated with how you operate and work, you push things way too hard. I hate to say this, but you are the kind of submitter who gets his way by being persistent rather than making well formed pleasant submissions that are easy to integrate.