netdev - Re: [PATCH perf/core REBASE 2/5] samples/bpf: Switch over to libbpf

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: <20161216142137.GF2742@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 16 Dec 2016 12:21:37 -0200
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
To:     Joe Stringer <joe@....org>
Cc:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>,
        ast@...com, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH perf/core REBASE 2/5] samples/bpf: Switch over to libbpf

Em Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 05:48:31PM -0800, Joe Stringer escreveu:
> On 15 December 2016 at 14:00, Joe Stringer <joe@....org> wrote:
> > On 15 December 2016 at 10:34, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org> wrote:
> >> So, I'm stopping here so that I can push what I have to Ingo, then I'll get
> >> back to this, hopefully by then you beat me and I have just to retest 8-)

> > OK, thanks for the report. Looks like there was another difference
> > between the two libbpfs - one used total program size for its
> > load_program API; the actual kernel API uses instruction count. This
> > incremental should do the trick:

> > https://github.com/joestringer/linux/commit/6ff7726f20077bed66fb725f5189c13690154b6a
 
> The full branch with this change (fast-forward from your tmp branch)
> is available here:
> https://github.com/joestringer/linux/tree/submit/libbpf_samples_v5
 
> I tried running every selftest and BPF sample I could get my hands on;
> there's one or two that I couldn't run, but seemed more to do with my
> versions of TC/iproute and kernel config rather than libbpf changes.
> Let me know if you see any further trouble.

Thanks for doing that! I'll try and reproduce your tests as soon as I'm
back to the office, it looks like it all will go together in my next
pull to Ingo.

- Arnaldo