[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6020f6eca63de_cc8682084c@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch>
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2021 00:31:40 -0800
From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, duanxiongchun@...edance.com,
wangdongdong.6@...edance.com, jiang.wang@...edance.com,
Cong Wang <cong.wang@...edance.com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>,
Lorenz Bauer <lmb@...udflare.com>
Subject: RE: [Patch bpf-next 05/19] sock_map: introduce BPF_SK_SKB_VERDICT
Cong Wang wrote:
> From: Cong Wang <cong.wang@...edance.com>
>
> I was planning to reuse BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_VERDICT but its name is
> confusing and more importantly it seems kTLS relies on it to deliver
> sk_msg too. To avoid messing up kTLS, we can just reuse the stream
> verdict code but introduce a new type of eBPF program, skb_verdict.
> Users are not allowed to set stream_verdict and skb_verdict at the
> same time.
>
> Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
> Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
> Cc: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
> Cc: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@...udflare.com>
> Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <cong.wang@...edance.com>
I think it will be better if we can keep the same name. Does it break
kTLS somehow? I'm not seeing it with a quick scan.
We can always alias a better name with the same value for readability.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists