Re: [PATCH V3 2/3] ARM: net: bpf_jit: make code generation less dependent on struct sk_filter.

Re: [PATCH V3 2/3] ARM: net: bpf_jit: make code generation less dependent on struct sk_filter.

[Daniel Borkmann]

On 04/24/2013 07:27 PM, Nicolas Schichan wrote:
> This is in preparation of bpf_jit support for seccomp filters.

Please also CC the netdev list for BPF related patches.

Just to give you a heads-up, this might likely lead to a merge
conflict with the net-next tree (commit 79617801ea0c0e66, "filter:
bpf_jit_comp: refactor and unify BPF JIT image dump output").

> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Schichan <nschichan@freebox.fr>
> ---
>   arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c |   46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
>   1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c b/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c
> index a0bd8a7..bb66a2b 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c
> @@ -55,7 +55,8 @@
>   #define FLAG_NEED_X_RESET	(1 << 0)
>
>   struct jit_ctx {
> -	const struct sk_filter *skf;
> +	unsigned short prog_len;
> +	struct sock_filter *prog_insns;
>   	unsigned idx;
>   	unsigned prologue_bytes;
>   	int ret0_fp_idx;
> @@ -131,8 +132,8 @@ static u16 saved_regs(struct jit_ctx *ctx)
>   {
>   	u16 ret = 0;
>
> -	if ((ctx->skf->len > 1) ||
> -	    (ctx->skf->insns[0].code == BPF_S_RET_A))
> +	if ((ctx->prog_len > 1) ||
> +	    (ctx->prog_insns[0].code == BPF_S_RET_A))
>   		ret |= 1 << r_A;
>
>   #ifdef CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER
> @@ -181,7 +182,7 @@ static inline bool is_load_to_a(u16 inst)
>   static void build_prologue(struct jit_ctx *ctx)
>   {
>   	u16 reg_set = saved_regs(ctx);
> -	u16 first_inst = ctx->skf->insns[0].code;
> +	u16 first_inst = ctx->prog_insns[0].code;
>   	u16 off;
>
>   #ifdef CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER
> @@ -279,7 +280,7 @@ static u16 imm_offset(u32 k, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
>   		ctx->imms[i] = k;
>
>   	/* constants go just after the epilogue */
> -	offset =  ctx->offsets[ctx->skf->len];
> +	offset =  ctx->offsets[ctx->prog_len];
>   	offset += ctx->prologue_bytes;
>   	offset += ctx->epilogue_bytes;
>   	offset += i * 4;
> @@ -419,7 +420,7 @@ static inline void emit_err_ret(u8 cond, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
>   		emit(ARM_MOV_R(ARM_R0, ARM_R0), ctx);
>   	} else {
>   		_emit(cond, ARM_MOV_I(ARM_R0, 0), ctx);
> -		_emit(cond, ARM_B(b_imm(ctx->skf->len, ctx)), ctx);
> +		_emit(cond, ARM_B(b_imm(ctx->prog_len, ctx)), ctx);
>   	}
>   }
>
> @@ -469,14 +470,13 @@ static inline void update_on_xread(struct jit_ctx *ctx)
>   static int build_body(struct jit_ctx *ctx)
>   {
>   	void *load_func[] = {jit_get_skb_b, jit_get_skb_h, jit_get_skb_w};
> -	const struct sk_filter *prog = ctx->skf;
>   	const struct sock_filter *inst;
>   	unsigned i, load_order, off, condt;
>   	int imm12;
>   	u32 k;
>
> -	for (i = 0; i < prog->len; i++) {
> -		inst = &(prog->insns[i]);
> +	for (i = 0; i < ctx->prog_len; i++) {
> +		inst = &(ctx->prog_insns[i]);
>   		/* K as an immediate value operand */
>   		k = inst->k;
>
> @@ -769,8 +769,8 @@ cmp_x:
>   				ctx->ret0_fp_idx = i;
>   			emit_mov_i(ARM_R0, k, ctx);
>   b_epilogue:
> -			if (i != ctx->skf->len - 1)
> -				emit(ARM_B(b_imm(prog->len, ctx)), ctx);
> +			if (i != ctx->prog_len - 1)
> +				emit(ARM_B(b_imm(ctx->prog_len, ctx)), ctx);
>   			break;
>   		case BPF_S_MISC_TAX:
>   			/* X = A */
> @@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ b_epilogue:
>   }
>
>
> -void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
> +static void __bpf_jit_compile(struct jit_ctx *out_ctx)
>   {
>   	struct jit_ctx ctx;
>   	unsigned tmp_idx;
> @@ -867,11 +867,10 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
>   	if (!bpf_jit_enable)
>   		return;
>
> -	memset(&ctx, 0, sizeof(ctx));
> -	ctx.skf		= fp;
> +	ctx = *out_ctx;
>   	ctx.ret0_fp_idx = -1;
>
> -	ctx.offsets = kzalloc(4 * (ctx.skf->len + 1), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	ctx.offsets = kzalloc(4 * (ctx.prog_len + 1), GFP_KERNEL);
>   	if (ctx.offsets == NULL)
>   		return;
>
> @@ -921,13 +920,26 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
>   		print_hex_dump(KERN_INFO, "BPF JIT code: ",
>   			       DUMP_PREFIX_ADDRESS, 16, 4, ctx.target,
>   			       alloc_size, false);
> -
> -	fp->bpf_func = (void *)ctx.target;
>   out:
>   	kfree(ctx.offsets);
> +
> +	*out_ctx = ctx;
>   	return;
>   }
>
> +void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
> +{
> +	struct jit_ctx ctx;
> +
> +	memset(&ctx, 0, sizeof(ctx));
> +	ctx.prog_len = fp->len;
> +	ctx.prog_insns = fp->insns;
> +
> +	__bpf_jit_compile(&ctx);
> +	if (ctx.target)
> +		fp->bpf_func = (void *)ctx.target;
> +}
> +
>   static void bpf_jit_free_worker(struct work_struct *work)
>   {
>   	module_free(NULL, work);
>

Re: [PATCH V3 2/3] ARM: net: bpf_jit: make code generation less dependent on struct sk_filter.

[Daniel Borkmann]

On 04/26/2013 09:26 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 16:04:44 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>> On Wednesday 24 April 2013 19:27:08 Nicolas Schichan wrote:
>>> @@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ b_epilogue:
>>>   }
>>>
>>>
>>> -void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
>>> +static void __bpf_jit_compile(struct jit_ctx *out_ctx)
>>>   {
>>>          struct jit_ctx ctx;
>>>          unsigned tmp_idx;
>>> @@ -867,11 +867,10 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
>>>          if (!bpf_jit_enable)
>>>                  return;
>>>
>>> -       memset(&ctx, 0, sizeof(ctx));
>>> -       ctx.skf         = fp;
>>> +       ctx = *out_ctx;
>>>          ctx.ret0_fp_idx = -1;
>>>
>>> -       ctx.offsets = kzalloc(4 * (ctx.skf->len + 1), GFP_KERNEL);
>>> +       ctx.offsets = kzalloc(4 * (ctx.prog_len + 1), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>          if (ctx.offsets == NULL)
>>>                  return;
>>>
>>> @@ -921,13 +920,26 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
>>>                  print_hex_dump(KERN_INFO, "BPF JIT code: ",
>>>                                 DUMP_PREFIX_ADDRESS, 16, 4, ctx.target,
>>>                                 alloc_size, false);
>>> -
>>> -       fp->bpf_func = (void *)ctx.target;
>>>   out:
>>>          kfree(ctx.offsets);
>>> +
>>> +       *out_ctx = ctx;
>>>          return;
>>
>> This part of the patch, in combination with 79617801e "filter: bpf_jit_comp:
>> refactor and unify BPF JIT image dump output" is now causing build errors
>> in linux-next:
>>
>> arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c: In function '__bpf_jit_compile':
>> arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c:930:16: error: 'fp' undeclared (first use in this function)
>>     bpf_jit_dump(fp->len, alloc_size, 2, ctx.target);
>
> Thanks, I did this.  There may be a smarter way...

I think also seccomp_jit_compile() would need this change then, otherwise the build
with CONFIG_SECCOMP_FILTER_JIT might break.

I can fix this up for you if not already applied. I presume it's against
linux-next tree?

> --- a/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c~arm-net-bpf_jit-make-code-generation-less-dependent-on-struct-sk_filter-fix
> +++ a/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c
> @@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ b_epilogue:
>   }
>
>
> -static void __bpf_jit_compile(struct jit_ctx *out_ctx)
> +static void __bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp, struct jit_ctx *out_ctx)
>   {
>   	struct jit_ctx ctx;
>   	unsigned tmp_idx;
> @@ -934,7 +934,7 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *f
>   	ctx.prog_len = fp->len;
>   	ctx.prog_insns = fp->insns;
>
> -	__bpf_jit_compile(&ctx);
> +	__bpf_jit_compile(fp, &ctx);
>   	if (ctx.target)
>   		fp->bpf_func = (void *)ctx.target;
>   }
> _
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>

Re: [PATCH V3 2/3] ARM: net: bpf_jit: make code generation less dependent on struct sk_filter.

[Andrew Morton]

On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:47:46 +0200 Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 04/26/2013 09:26 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 16:04:44 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> >> On Wednesday 24 April 2013 19:27:08 Nicolas Schichan wrote:
> >>> @@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ b_epilogue:
> >>>   }
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
> >>> +static void __bpf_jit_compile(struct jit_ctx *out_ctx)
> >>>   {
> >>>          struct jit_ctx ctx;
> >>>          unsigned tmp_idx;
> >>> @@ -867,11 +867,10 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
> >>>          if (!bpf_jit_enable)
> >>>                  return;
> >>>
> >>> -       memset(&ctx, 0, sizeof(ctx));
> >>> -       ctx.skf         = fp;
> >>> +       ctx = *out_ctx;
> >>>          ctx.ret0_fp_idx = -1;
> >>>
> >>> -       ctx.offsets = kzalloc(4 * (ctx.skf->len + 1), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>> +       ctx.offsets = kzalloc(4 * (ctx.prog_len + 1), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>>          if (ctx.offsets == NULL)
> >>>                  return;
> >>>
> >>> @@ -921,13 +920,26 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
> >>>                  print_hex_dump(KERN_INFO, "BPF JIT code: ",
> >>>                                 DUMP_PREFIX_ADDRESS, 16, 4, ctx.target,
> >>>                                 alloc_size, false);
> >>> -
> >>> -       fp->bpf_func = (void *)ctx.target;
> >>>   out:
> >>>          kfree(ctx.offsets);
> >>> +
> >>> +       *out_ctx = ctx;
> >>>          return;
> >>
> >> This part of the patch, in combination with 79617801e "filter: bpf_jit_comp:
> >> refactor and unify BPF JIT image dump output" is now causing build errors
> >> in linux-next:
> >>
> >> arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c: In function '__bpf_jit_compile':
> >> arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c:930:16: error: 'fp' undeclared (first use in this function)
> >>     bpf_jit_dump(fp->len, alloc_size, 2, ctx.target);
> >
> > Thanks, I did this.  There may be a smarter way...
> 
> I think also seccomp_jit_compile() would need this change then, otherwise the build
> with CONFIG_SECCOMP_FILTER_JIT might break.

urgh, that tears it.

> I can fix this up for you if not already applied. I presume it's against
> linux-next tree?

Yup, please send something.

Re: [PATCH V3 2/3] ARM: net: bpf_jit: make code generation less dependent on struct sk_filter.

[Daniel Borkmann]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2916 bytes --]

On 04/26/2013 10:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:47:46 +0200 Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 04/26/2013 09:26 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 16:04:44 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday 24 April 2013 19:27:08 Nicolas Schichan wrote:
>>>>> @@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ b_epilogue:
>>>>>    }
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
>>>>> +static void __bpf_jit_compile(struct jit_ctx *out_ctx)
>>>>>    {
>>>>>           struct jit_ctx ctx;
>>>>>           unsigned tmp_idx;
>>>>> @@ -867,11 +867,10 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
>>>>>           if (!bpf_jit_enable)
>>>>>                   return;
>>>>>
>>>>> -       memset(&ctx, 0, sizeof(ctx));
>>>>> -       ctx.skf         = fp;
>>>>> +       ctx = *out_ctx;
>>>>>           ctx.ret0_fp_idx = -1;
>>>>>
>>>>> -       ctx.offsets = kzalloc(4 * (ctx.skf->len + 1), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>> +       ctx.offsets = kzalloc(4 * (ctx.prog_len + 1), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>           if (ctx.offsets == NULL)
>>>>>                   return;
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -921,13 +920,26 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
>>>>>                   print_hex_dump(KERN_INFO, "BPF JIT code: ",
>>>>>                                  DUMP_PREFIX_ADDRESS, 16, 4, ctx.target,
>>>>>                                  alloc_size, false);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -       fp->bpf_func = (void *)ctx.target;
>>>>>    out:
>>>>>           kfree(ctx.offsets);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +       *out_ctx = ctx;
>>>>>           return;
>>>>
>>>> This part of the patch, in combination with 79617801e "filter: bpf_jit_comp:
>>>> refactor and unify BPF JIT image dump output" is now causing build errors
>>>> in linux-next:
>>>>
>>>> arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c: In function '__bpf_jit_compile':
>>>> arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c:930:16: error: 'fp' undeclared (first use in this function)
>>>>      bpf_jit_dump(fp->len, alloc_size, 2, ctx.target);
>>>
>>> Thanks, I did this.  There may be a smarter way...
>>
>> I think also seccomp_jit_compile() would need this change then, otherwise the build
>> with CONFIG_SECCOMP_FILTER_JIT might break.
>
> urgh, that tears it.
>
>> I can fix this up for you if not already applied. I presume it's against
>> linux-next tree?
>
> Yup, please send something.

Patch is attached. However, I currently don't have an ARM toolchain at hand, so
uncompiled, untested.

@Nicolas, Xi (cc, ref: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1481464):

If there is someday support for other archs as well, it would be nice if we
do not have each time duplicated seccomp_jit_compile() etc functions in each
JIT implementation, i.e. because they do basically the same. So follow-up
{fix,clean}up is appreciated.

Also, I find it a bit weird that seccomp_filter_get_len() and some other
_one-line_ functions from kernel/seccomp.c are not placed into the
corresponding header file as inlines.

[-- Attachment #2: 0001-ARM-bpf_jit-seccomp-filtering-fixup-merge-conflict.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1668 bytes --]

>From 655f4aabee7ccb909345ccfce92a405e3d173de5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
Message-Id: <655f4aabee7ccb909345ccfce92a405e3d173de5.1367012811.git.dborkman@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <cover.1367012811.git.dborkman@redhat.com>
References: <cover.1367012811.git.dborkman@redhat.com>
From: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 23:41:06 +0200
Subject: [PATCH linux-next -mm] ARM: bpf_jit: seccomp filtering: fixup merge conflict

Commit e4c67f4c0479d8e3cb0 (ARM: net: bpf_jit: make code generation
less dependent on struct sk_filter.) caused a merge conflict with
commit 79617801ea0c0e6 (filter: bpf_jit_comp: refactor and unify
BPF JIT image dump output) resulting in a build failure:

arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c: In function '__bpf_jit_compile':
arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c:930:16: error: 'fp' undeclared (first use in this function)
    bpf_jit_dump(fp->len, alloc_size, 2, ctx.target);

Fix this up by using ctx.prog_len that is being set before we enter
__bpf_jit_compile().

Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Nicolas Schichan <nschichan@freebox.fr>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
---
 arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c b/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c
index c5ef845..eb4daba 100644
--- a/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c
+++ b/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c
@@ -927,7 +927,7 @@ static void __bpf_jit_compile(struct jit_ctx *out_ctx)
 
 	if (bpf_jit_enable > 1)
 		/* there are 2 passes here */
-		bpf_jit_dump(fp->len, alloc_size, 2, ctx.target);
+		bpf_jit_dump(ctx.prog_len, alloc_size, 2, ctx.target);
 out:
 	kfree(ctx.offsets);
 
-- 
1.7.11.7

Re: [PATCH V3 2/3] ARM: net: bpf_jit: make code generation less dependent on struct sk_filter.

[Xi Wang]

Thanks for CCing.  One way to clean up this would be to refactor the
bpf jit interface as:

  bpf_func_t bpf_jit_compile(struct sock_filter *filter, unsigned int flen);
  void bpf_jit_free(bpf_func_t bpf_func);

Then both packet and seccomp filters can share the unified interface.
Also, we don't need seccomp_filter_get_len() and other helpers.

Do you want me to rebase my patch against linux-next and see how that goes?

- xi

On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 6:01 PM, Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 04/26/2013 10:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:47:46 +0200 Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 04/26/2013 09:26 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 16:04:44 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wednesday 24 April 2013 19:27:08 Nicolas Schichan wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ b_epilogue:
>>>>>>    }
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
>>>>>> +static void __bpf_jit_compile(struct jit_ctx *out_ctx)
>>>>>>    {
>>>>>>           struct jit_ctx ctx;
>>>>>>           unsigned tmp_idx;
>>>>>> @@ -867,11 +867,10 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
>>>>>>           if (!bpf_jit_enable)
>>>>>>                   return;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -       memset(&ctx, 0, sizeof(ctx));
>>>>>> -       ctx.skf         = fp;
>>>>>> +       ctx = *out_ctx;
>>>>>>           ctx.ret0_fp_idx = -1;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -       ctx.offsets = kzalloc(4 * (ctx.skf->len + 1), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>> +       ctx.offsets = kzalloc(4 * (ctx.prog_len + 1), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>>           if (ctx.offsets == NULL)
>>>>>>                   return;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @@ -921,13 +920,26 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
>>>>>>                   print_hex_dump(KERN_INFO, "BPF JIT code: ",
>>>>>>                                  DUMP_PREFIX_ADDRESS, 16, 4,
>>>>>> ctx.target,
>>>>>>                                  alloc_size, false);
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> -       fp->bpf_func = (void *)ctx.target;
>>>>>>    out:
>>>>>>           kfree(ctx.offsets);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +       *out_ctx = ctx;
>>>>>>           return;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This part of the patch, in combination with 79617801e "filter:
>>>>> bpf_jit_comp:
>>>>> refactor and unify BPF JIT image dump output" is now causing build
>>>>> errors
>>>>> in linux-next:
>>>>>
>>>>> arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c: In function '__bpf_jit_compile':
>>>>> arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c:930:16: error: 'fp' undeclared (first use in
>>>>> this function)
>>>>>      bpf_jit_dump(fp->len, alloc_size, 2, ctx.target);
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, I did this.  There may be a smarter way...
>>>
>>>
>>> I think also seccomp_jit_compile() would need this change then, otherwise
>>> the build
>>> with CONFIG_SECCOMP_FILTER_JIT might break.
>>
>>
>> urgh, that tears it.
>>
>>> I can fix this up for you if not already applied. I presume it's against
>>> linux-next tree?
>>
>>
>> Yup, please send something.
>
>
> Patch is attached. However, I currently don't have an ARM toolchain at hand,
> so
> uncompiled, untested.
>
> @Nicolas, Xi (cc, ref: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1481464):
>
> If there is someday support for other archs as well, it would be nice if we
> do not have each time duplicated seccomp_jit_compile() etc functions in each
> JIT implementation, i.e. because they do basically the same. So follow-up
> {fix,clean}up is appreciated.
>
> Also, I find it a bit weird that seccomp_filter_get_len() and some other
> _one-line_ functions from kernel/seccomp.c are not placed into the
> corresponding header file as inlines.

Re: [PATCH V3 2/3] ARM: net: bpf_jit: make code generation less dependent on struct sk_filter.

[Daniel Borkmann]

On 04/27/2013 12:18 AM, Xi Wang wrote:
> Thanks for CCing.  One way to clean up this would be to refactor the
> bpf jit interface as:
>
>    bpf_func_t bpf_jit_compile(struct sock_filter *filter, unsigned int flen);
>    void bpf_jit_free(bpf_func_t bpf_func);
>
> Then both packet and seccomp filters can share the unified interface.
> Also, we don't need seccomp_filter_get_len() and other helpers.
>
> Do you want me to rebase my patch against linux-next and see how that goes?

Sure, whatever works for you. Not sure if it will still make it though.

Also, as Eric already mentioned earlier, please do not top-post your mails!
I think one reminder should be sufficient for that. ;-)

Re: [PATCH V3 2/3] ARM: net: bpf_jit: make code generation less dependent on struct sk_filter.

[David Miller]

Please stop top-posting.

Thank you.