netdev - Re: [PATCH v5 bpf-next 3/3] bpf: add selftest for BPF_ENABLE

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 28 Apr 2020 15:13:52 -0700
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
Cc:     Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "ast@...nel.org" <ast@...nel.org>,
        "daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 bpf-next 3/3] bpf: add selftest for BPF_ENABLE_STATS

On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 3:09 PM Song Liu <songliubraving@...com> wrote:
> >> +
> >> +struct {
> >> +    __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY);
> >> +    __uint(max_entries, 1);
> >> +    __type(key, __u32);
> >> +    __type(value, __u64);
> >> +} count SEC(".maps");
> >
> > Looks like a global variable can be used here?
>
> We can use global variable. But it doesn't really matter for this test.
> Any BPF program will work here. Do we really need a v6 for this change?

yes. please.
Otherwise folks will copy paste this inefficiency into future tests.