From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Borkmann Subject: Re: [MERGE README] net --> net-next Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 21:41:33 +0200 Message-ID: <59ECF46D.30903@iogearbox.net> References: <20171022.135717.971703426919688431.davem@davemloft.net> <59EC9877.6080702@iogearbox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ast@kernel.org, john.fastabend@gmail.com To: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from www62.your-server.de ([213.133.104.62]:45779 "EHLO www62.your-server.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932085AbdJVTlg (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Oct 2017 15:41:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <59EC9877.6080702@iogearbox.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 10/22/2017 03:09 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > On 10/22/2017 02:57 PM, David Miller wrote: >> >> There were quite a few BPF conflicts during the merge I just did of >> 'net' into 'net-next'. >> >> In particular, all of the packet pointer branch tests in the verifier >> had to be resolved wrt. three different sets of changes. >> >> The off-by-one stuff. The allowance of the 'data_end > ptr + x' form >> of packet pointer checks. And finally, the metadata stuff. >> >> I would really appreciate an audit and double check of my merge work >> by the interested parties. > > I will do a review today in the evening, thanks David! Looks good overall, I notices two things (in find_good_pkt_pointers() in the second loop the max_t(u16, ...) still exists instead of just max() in -net and in test_verifier the test cases for 'XDP pkt read' are split in the middle with other test cases for bpf_exit). I'll send a cleanup on Monday for this along with the matches for metadata part. Thanks, Daniel