netdev - Re: [PATCH 3/4] bpf, docs: Only document eBPF in instruction-set.rst

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]

Message-ID: <CAADnVQKakFTQTnW6q-9eWsmgLcc7eTGbPM=a4A9PWNdXGrgKjA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Dec 2021 21:40:46 -0800
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] bpf, docs: Only document eBPF in instruction-set.rst

On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 6:04 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
>  Three LSB bits store instruction class which is one of:
>
> -  ===================     ===============
> -  Classic BPF classes     eBPF classes
> -  ===================     ===============
> -  BPF_LD    0x00          BPF_LD    0x00
> -  BPF_LDX   0x01          BPF_LDX   0x01
> -  BPF_ST    0x02          BPF_ST    0x02
> -  BPF_STX   0x03          BPF_STX   0x03
> -  BPF_ALU   0x04          BPF_ALU   0x04
> -  BPF_JMP   0x05          BPF_JMP   0x05
> -  BPF_RET   0x06          BPF_JMP32 0x06
> -  BPF_MISC  0x07          BPF_ALU64 0x07
> -  ===================     ===============

I don't want to lose the classic vs extended visual comparison.
These were one the most valuable tables to me.
Maybe instead of intro.rst call it classic_vs_extended.rst ?
or history.rst ?

That would be patch 2 as-is plus extra tables and text
that this patch removes.
There will be a bit of overlap between history.rst
and instruction-set.rst.
I think it's ok.

The rest makes sense to me.

Maybe Daniel has better ideas.