[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <517E6505.6030005@freebox.fr>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:18:13 +0200
From: Nicolas Schichan <nschichan@...ebox.fr>
To: Xi Wang <xi.wang@...il.com>
CC: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mircea Gherzan <mgherzan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/6] seccomp filter JIT
On 04/26/2013 02:31 PM, Xi Wang wrote:
> Thanks for the pointer.
>
> For the ARM part, looks like Nicolas's patch requires to implement two
> wrappers for each arch:
>
> void seccomp_jit_compile(struct seccomp_filter *fp);
> void seccomp_jit_free(struct seccomp_filter *fp);
>
> The implementation of these wrappers is almost identical to:
>
> void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp);
> void bpf_jit_free(struct sk_filter *fp);
>
> While this patch uses a unified interface for both packet & seccomp filters.
>
> bpf_func_t bpf_jit_compile(struct sock_filter *filter, unsigned int flen);
> void bpf_jit_free(bpf_func_t bpf_func);
>
> Shouldn't be hard to merge though.
Hi,
I went for the solution I submitted because I wanted to avoid changes to the
current bpf_jit_compile prototypes for all currently supported architectures
(for most of which, I can only compile-test).
My solution also allows the seccomp jit code to be disabled while still
allowing jit on socket filters (via a Kconfig option). This might be useful to
some people.
Regards,
--
Nicolas Schichan
Freebox SAS
--
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