On 07/11/2016 06:51 PM, Brenden Blanco wrote:
On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 03:56:02PM -0500, Tom Herbert wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Brenden Blanco <bbla...@plumgrid.com> wrote:
[...]
+static bool __is_valid_xdp_access(int off, int size,
+ enum bpf_access_type type)
+{
+ if (off < 0 || off >= sizeof(struct xdp_md))
+ return false;
+ if (off % size != 0)
off & 3 != 0
Feasible, but was intending to keep with the surrounding style. What do
the other bpf maintainers think?
+ return false;
+ if (size != 4)
+ return false;
If size must always be 4 why is it even an argument?
Because this is the first time that the verifier has a chance to check
it, and size == 4 could potentially be a prog_type-specific requirement.
Yep and wrt above, I think it's more important that all is_valid_*_access()
functions are consistent to each other and easily reviewable than adding
optimizations to some of them, which is slow-path anyway. If we find a nice
simplification, then we should apply it also to others obviously.
