[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzbBJgcD-QOyWPLWdMf+CZHFnpyLd-F9-eiZ-4fGsS_y6A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2021 22:25:58 -0700
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: reject static entry-point BPF programs
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 4:14 PM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 1:34 PM Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Detect use of static entry-point BPF programs (those with SEC() markings) and
> > emit error message.
>
> Applied. I was wondering whether you've seen such combinations ?
Haven't seen this anywhere in the real code, only tested locally by
adding static to one of selftests. Unlikely to break anyone, but good
to be as strict as with maps.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists