[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAADnVQ+BCxsKEK=ZzYOZkgTJAg_7jz1_f+FCX+Ms0vTOuW8Mxw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 14:22:59 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
Kairui Song <kasong@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] objtool: Fix ORC unwinding in non-JIT BPF
generated code
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 2:19 PM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > +#define JUMP_TABLE_SYM_PREFIX "jump_table."
> > > >
> > > > since external tool will be looking at it should it be named
> > > > "bpf_jump_table." to avoid potential name conflicts?
> > > > Or even more unique name?
> > > > Like "bpf_interpreter_jump_table." ?
> > >
> > > No, the point is that it's a generic feature which can also be used any
> > > non-BPF code which might also have a jump table.
> >
> > and you're proposing to name all such jump tables in the kernel
> > as static foo jump_table[] ?
>
> That's the idea.
Then it needs much wider discussion.
I suggest to rename it to "bpf_interpreter_jump_table."
so it can be resolved now for this specific issue.
While bigger kernel-wide naming convention get resolved.
Later we can rename it to whatever the "standard name for jump table"
will be.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists