netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 04/11] bpf: Support passing args to sock

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 24 Jan 2018 02:34:55 +0100
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Lawrence Brakmo <brakmo@...com>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>, Blake Matheny <bmatheny@...com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 04/11] bpf: Support passing args to sock_ops
 bpf function

On 01/24/2018 02:30 AM, Lawrence Brakmo wrote:
> On 1/23/18, 5:11 PM, "Daniel Borkmann" <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote:
[...]
>     > +{
>     > +	return -EPERM;
>     > +}
>     > +
>     > +static inline int tcp_call_bpf_4arg(struct sock *sk, int op, u32 arg1, u32 arg2,
>     > +				    u32 arg3, u32 arg4)
>     > +{
>     > +	return -EPERM;
>     > +}
>     > +
>     >  #endif
>     
>     tcp_call_bpf_1arg() and tcp_call_bpf_4arg() unused for the time being?
> 
> Yes, I just thought I should add them for completeness. Should I remove them until
> they are actually used?

Yeah, I think that would be preferred way.

Thanks again,
Daniel