[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5898CBEF.20201@iogearbox.net>
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 20:18:07 +0100
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 6/7] bpf: Use the bpf_load_program() from
the library
On 02/06/2017 08:16 PM, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
> On 06/02/2017 16:30, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 02/06/2017 12:14 AM, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
>>> Replace bpf_prog_load() with bpf_load_program() calls.
>>>
>>> Use the tools include directory instead of the installed one to allow
>>> builds from other kernels.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
>>> Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>
>>> Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
>>> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
>>> ---
>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile | 6 +++++-
>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_sys.h | 21 ---------------------
>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_tag.c | 6 ++++--
>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 8 +++++---
>>> 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>>
>> No objections, but if so, can't we add the remaining missing
>> pieces to bpf lib, so we can remove bpf_sys.h altogether?
>
> OK, I'll send a new patch replacing bpf_sys.h entirely.
Sounds great, thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists