[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170608165004.n5jc33pocxlytuvf@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 09:50:06 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
iovisor-dev <iovisor-dev@...ts.iovisor.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 3/5] bpf/verifier: feed
pointer-to-unknown-scalar casts into scalar ALU path
On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 04:25:39PM +0100, Edward Cree wrote:
> On 08/06/17 03:35, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > such large back and forth move doesn't help reviewing.
> > may be just merge it into previous patch?
> > Or keep that function in the right place in patch 2 already?
> I think 'diff' got a bit confused, and maybe with different options I could
> have got it to produce something more readable. But I think I will just
> merge this into patch 2; it's only separate because it started out as an
> experiment.
after sleeping on it I'm not sure we should be allowing such pointer
arithmetic. In normal C code people do fancy tricks with lower 3 bits
of the pointer, but in bpf code I cannot see such use case.
What kind of realistic code will be doing ptr & 0x40 ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists