[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzZbXmBjJHifBHCB_okYh0V6wuN2V7COUdzT4=_VxyTo7g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2024 10:51:56 -0700
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
linux-trace-kernel <linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...nel.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, Jordan Rife <jrife@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH trace/for-next 2/3] bpf: decouple BPF link/attach hook and
BPF program sleepable semantics
On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 9:27 AM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 2:23 PM Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > static inline void bpf_link_init(struct bpf_link *link, enum bpf_link_type type,
> > const struct bpf_link_ops *ops,
> > - struct bpf_prog *prog)
> > + struct bpf_prog *prog, bool sleepable)
> > +{
> > +}
>
> Obvious typo caught by build bot...
> Other than that the set looks good.
Yeah, leftover from the initial attempt (I decided to not touch
bpf_link_init() in the end to avoid updating like 20 places where we
do this for various link types). I'll send a new version.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists