[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 20:23:52 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, will.deacon@....com,
arnd@...db.de, yang.shi@...aro.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, zlim.lnx@...il.com, ast@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
xi.wang@...il.com, catalin.marinas@....com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, yhs@...mgrid.com,
bblanco@...mgrid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: bpf: add BPF XADD instruction
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 07:50:15PM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> Well, on that note, it's not like you just change the target to bpf in your
> Makefile and can compile (& load into the kernel) anything you want with it.
> You do have to write small, restricted programs from scratch for a specific
> use-case with the limited set of helper functions and intrinsics that are
> available from the kernel. So I don't think that "Programs that used to work
> will now no longer work." holds if you regard it as such.
So I don't get this argument. If everything is so targeted, then why are
the BPF instructions an ABI.
If OTOH you're expected to be able to transfer these small proglets,
then too I would expect to transfer the source of these proglets.
You cannot argue both ways.
--
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