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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 11:32:07 -0700 From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com> To: "Wangnan (F)" <wangnan0@...wei.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> CC: paulus@...ba.org, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, dsahern@...il.com, daniel@...earbox.net, brendan.d.gregg@...il.com, masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com, lizefan@...wei.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pi3orama@....com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 16/37] bpf tools: Collect eBPF programs from their own sections On 5/18/15 5:47 AM, Wangnan (F) wrote: > > >>> + prog->insns_cnt = size / sizeof(struct bpf_insn); >>> + memcpy(prog->insns, data, >>> + prog->insns_cnt * sizeof(struct bpf_insn)); >> Doesn't the data need to be swapped? >> >> Thanks, >> Namhyung >> > > I'm not very sure, since they are instructions. Byte order of > instructions and byte order of data > are not always same. Think about ARM. Therefore another choice is to > swap them in kernel, > keep user-kernel interface clean. > > Alexei Starovoitov, do you think we should use uniformed instruction > byte order in both big and little > endian kernel on user-kernel interface, or let userspace feed swapped > instructions to kernel if > endianess is not match? see my reply to the other patch. endianness is the job of llvm. Let's fix it there. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists