linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] MIPS: BPF: JIT fixes and improvements.

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-Id: <20170314.172937.1289357366273291363.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Tue, 14 Mar 2017 17:29:37 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     david.daney@...ium.com
Cc:     linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, ralf@...ux-mips.org,
        james.hogan@...tec.com, ast@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, steven.hill@...ium.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] MIPS: BPF: JIT fixes and improvements.

From: David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 14:21:39 -0700

> Changes from v1:
> 
>   - Use unsigned access for SKF_AD_HATYPE
> 
>   - Added three more patches for other problems found.
> 
> 
> Testing the BPF JIT on Cavium OCTEON (mips64) with the test-bpf module
> identified some failures and unimplemented features.
> 
> With this patch set we get:
> 
>      test_bpf: Summary: 305 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [85/297 JIT'ed]
> 
> Both big and little endian tested.
> 
> We still lack eBPF support, but this is better than nothing.

What tree are you targetting with these changes?  Do you expect
them to go via the MIPS or the net-next tree?

Please be explicit about this in the future.

Thank you.