From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Borkmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 0/2] split BPF out of core networking Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 10:56:10 +0200 Message-ID: <538D8DAA.7090105@redhat.com> References: <1401692506-7796-1-git-send-email-ast@plumgrid.com> <538C3C94.3080206@redhat.com> <538CAEA6.4060307@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "David S. Miller" , Ingo Molnar , Steven Rostedt , Chema Gonzalez , Eric Dumazet , Peter Zijlstra , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Jiri Olsa , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andrew Morton , Kees Cook , Network Development , LKML To: Alexei Starovoitov Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 06/02/2014 09:02 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: ... > Classic has all sorts of hard coded assumptions. The whole > concept of 'load from magic constant' to mean different things > is flawed. We all got used to it and now think that it's normal > for "ld_abs -4056" to mean "a ^= x" I think everyone knows that, no? Sure it doesn't fit into the concept, but I think at the time BPF extensions were introduced, it was probably seen as the best trade-off available to access useful skb fields while still trying to minimize exposure to uapi as much as possible. > This split is not trying to make classic easier to hack. > With eBPF underneath classic, it got a lot easier to add extensions > to classic, but we shouldn't be doing it. > Classic BPF is not generic and cannot become one. It's eBPF's job. > > The split is mainly helping to clearly see the boundary of eBPF core > vs its socket use case. It doesn't change or add any API. So what's the plan with everything in arch/*/net/, tools/net/ and in Documentation/networking/filter.txt, plus MAINTAINERS file, that the current patch doesn't address? We want changes to go via netdev@vger.kernel.org as they always did, since [ although other use cases pop up ] the main user, as I said, is simply still packet filtering in various networking subsystems, no? > This in-kernel API cleanup was done in commit 5fe821a9dee2 > You even acked it back then :) I agreed with that change, otherwise I wouldn't have acked it, of course.