[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F9E188E.80503@googlemail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 06:43:58 +0200
From: Jan Seiffert <kaffeemonster@...glemail.com>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
<matt@...abs.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION][PATCH V4 3/3] bpf jit: Let the powerpc jit handle
negative offsets
Benjamin Herrenschmidt schrieb:
> On Mon, 2012-04-30 at 06:27 +0200, Jan Seiffert wrote:
>> Benjamin Herrenschmidt schrieb:
>>> On Mon, 2012-04-30 at 12:43 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Matt's having a look at powerpc
>>>>
>>>> Ok, he hasn't so I'll dig a bit.
>>>>
>>>> No obvious wrongness (but I'm not very familiar with bpf), though I do
>>>> have a comment: sk_negative_common() and bpf_slow_path_common() should
>>>> be made one and single macro which takes the fallback function as an
>>>> argument.
>>>
>>> Ok, with the compile fix below it seems to work for me:
>>>
>>> (Feel free to fold that into the original patch)
>>>
>>
>> Should i resend the complete patch with the compile fix?
>
> Won't hurt...
>
Ok
> BTW. Any idea about that bpf_program vs. sock_fprog issue I mentioned
> earlier ?
>
No idea, i was going by the old saying:
"Thou shall not include kernel header, or you will feel the wrath of angry
kernel gurus."
> Cheers,
> Ben.
>
Greetings
Jan
--
The OO-Hype keeps on spinning, C stays.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists