From: Daniel Borkmann <dan...@iogearbox.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 23:03:09 +0200
> On 06/21/2018 06:08 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> On 06/20/2018 08:46 PM, David Miller wrote:
>>> From: Eric Dumazet <eduma...@google.com>
>>> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 17:24:09 -0700
>>>
>>>> After commit 9facc336876f ("bpf: reject any prog that failed read-only
>>>> lock")
>>>> offsetof(struct bpf_binary_header, image) became 3 instead of 4,
>>>> breaking powerpc BPF badly, since instructions need to be word aligned.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 9facc336876f ("bpf: reject any prog that failed read-only lock")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eduma...@google.com>
>>>
>>> I'll apply this directly, thanks Eric.
>>
>> Thanks David :)
>
> Sigh, sorry for the breakage, looks like I got fooled by x86 gcc.
>
> struct bpf_binary_header {
> u16 pages; /* 0 2 */
> u16 locked:1; /* 2:15 2 */
Note that you can also just make locked a plan u16 for now until you
need more flag bits, the code generated will be more efficient
especially on non-x86.
