From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2 master 1/2] bpf: improve error reporting around tail calls Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:28:25 -0700 Message-ID: <20170721162825.0b42e9ba@xeon-e3> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: ast@fb.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Borkmann Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f169.google.com ([209.85.192.169]:35897 "EHLO mail-pf0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753111AbdGUX2c (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jul 2017 19:28:32 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f169.google.com with SMTP id o88so28849762pfk.3 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:28:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 21:13:06 +0200 Daniel Borkmann wrote: > Currently, it's still quite hard to figure out if a prog passed the > verifier, but later gets rejected due to different tail call ownership. > Figure out whether that is the case and provide appropriate error > messages to the user. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Sorry, dead code. Please fix and resubmit. bpf.c:356:12: warning: =E2=80=98bpf_derive_prog_from_fdinfo=E2=80=99 define= d but not used [-Wunused-function] static int bpf_derive_prog_from_fdinfo(int fd, struct bpf_prog_data *prog)