[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1136c1a4-1a73-a419-5550-4ebd8aee9d25@digikod.net>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 22:30:18 +0100
From: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 6/7] bpf: Use the bpf_load_program() from the
library
On 06/02/2017 20:18, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 02/06/2017 08:16 PM, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
>> On 06/02/2017 16:30, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>>> On 02/06/2017 12:14 AM, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
>>>> Replace bpf_prog_load() with bpf_load_program() calls.
>>>>
>>>> Use the tools include directory instead of the installed one to allow
>>>> builds from other kernels.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
>>>> Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>
>>>> Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
>>>> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
>>>> ---
>>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile | 6 +++++-
>>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_sys.h | 21
>>>> ---------------------
>>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_tag.c | 6 ++++--
>>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 8 +++++---
>>>> 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> No objections, but if so, can't we add the remaining missing
>>> pieces to bpf lib, so we can remove bpf_sys.h altogether?
>>
>> OK, I'll send a new patch replacing bpf_sys.h entirely.
>
> Sounds great, thanks!
>
Do you prefer a big patch or one for each replaced function?
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists