From: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
To: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>, <ast@kernel.org>,
<daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/2] verifier liveness simplification
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2018 18:35:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f5fc398f-2dca-645a-c465-cba64236e807@solarflare.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <858638d7-dad4-cb70-478c-29a54a131e68@netronome.com>
On 03/10/18 16:36, Jiong Wang wrote:
> On 28/09/2018 14:36, Edward Cree wrote:
> > But what you've described sounds interesting; perhaps it would also
> > help later with loop-variable handling?
>
> Haven't considered how to use this for loop-variable handling, guess you mean
> applying what I have described to your previous loop detection RFC? I will look
> into your RFC later.
Tbh I was thinking more of John Fastabend's version (I'm not sure if he ever
got round to posting patches, but he discussed the design towards the end of
https://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg216285.html ) which
is building 'proper compiler data structures' and thus might be interested
in proper use-def chains. (Or it might not; I'm not really a compiler-guru
so it's not immediately obvious to me.)
My approach was much less interested in the 'provenance' of the induction
variable, just that it was increasing appropriately, so use-def chains are
not really relevant to it.
-Ed
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-05 0:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-22 19:00 [RFC PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/2] verifier liveness simplification Edward Cree
2018-08-22 19:02 ` [RFC PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/2] bpf/verifier: per-register parent pointers Edward Cree
2018-08-22 19:02 ` [RFC PATCH v2 bpf-next 2/2] bpf/verifier: display non-spill stack slot types in print_verifier_state Edward Cree
2018-08-30 2:18 ` [RFC PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/2] verifier liveness simplification Alexei Starovoitov
2018-08-31 15:50 ` Edward Cree
2018-09-26 22:16 ` Jiong Wang
2018-09-28 13:36 ` Edward Cree
2018-10-03 15:36 ` Jiong Wang
2018-10-03 15:59 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2018-10-03 16:53 ` Jiong Wang
2018-10-08 20:18 ` Jiong Wang
2018-10-04 17:35 ` Edward Cree [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=f5fc398f-2dca-645a-c465-cba64236e807@solarflare.com \
--to=ecree@solarflare.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=jiong.wang@netronome.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox