On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Daniel Borkmann <dbork...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 06/03/2014 05:44 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > ... >> >> All of your points are valid. They are right questions to ask. I just >> >> don't see why you're still arguing about first step of filter.c split, >> whereas your concerns are about steps 2, 3, 4. > > > Fair enough, lets keep them in mind though for future work. Btw,
Ok :) > are other files planned for kernel/bpf/ or should it instead just > simply be kernel/bpf.c? The most obvious one is eBPF verifier in separate file (kernel/bpf/verifier.c) bpf maps is yet another thing, but that's different topic. Probably a set of bpf-callable functions in another file. Like right now for sockets these helpers are __skb_get_pay_offset(), __skb_get_nlattr() For tracing there will be a different set of helper functions and eventually some will be common. Like __get_raw_cpu_id() from filter.c could eventually move to kernel/bpf/helpers.c I'm not a fan of squeezing different logic into one file. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
