On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:57 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
[...]
> Tracing use case got some improvements as well. Now eBPF programs can be
> attached to tracepoint, syscall, kprobe and C examples are more usable:
> ex1_kern.c - demonstrate how programs can walk in-kernel data structures
> ex2_ke
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:25 PM, David Miller wrote:
>>> From: David Laight
>>> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 08:52:30 +
>>>
From: Of Alexei Starovoitov
> one more RFC..
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:25 PM, David Miller wrote:
>> From: David Laight
>> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 08:52:30 +
>>
>>> From: Of Alexei Starovoitov
one more RFC...
Major difference vs previous set is a new 'load 64-bit i
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:25 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: David Laight
> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 08:52:30 +
>
>> From: Of Alexei Starovoitov
>>> one more RFC...
>>>
>>> Major difference vs previous set is a new 'load 64-bit immediate' eBPF insn.
>>> Which is first 16-byte instruction. It sh
From: David Laight
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 08:52:30 +
> From: Of Alexei Starovoitov
>> one more RFC...
>>
>> Major difference vs previous set is a new 'load 64-bit immediate' eBPF insn.
>> Which is first 16-byte instruction. It shows how eBPF ISA can be extended
>> while maintaining backward
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> But don't you need some kind of detection anyway to handle the case
> where something jumps to the middle of the "load 64-bit immediate"? I
added few test cases to test_verifier to see that this case is caught
and it looks ok, but you
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 1:52 AM, David Laight wrote:
>> From: Of Alexei Starovoitov
>>> one more RFC...
>>>
>>> Major difference vs previous set is a new 'load 64-bit immediate' eBPF insn.
>>> Which is first 16-byte instruction. It sho
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 1:52 AM, David Laight wrote:
> From: Of Alexei Starovoitov
>> one more RFC...
>>
>> Major difference vs previous set is a new 'load 64-bit immediate' eBPF insn.
>> Which is first 16-byte instruction. It shows how eBPF ISA can be extended
>> while maintaining backward compat
From: Of Alexei Starovoitov
> one more RFC...
>
> Major difference vs previous set is a new 'load 64-bit immediate' eBPF insn.
> Which is first 16-byte instruction. It shows how eBPF ISA can be extended
> while maintaining backward compatibility, but mainly it cleans up eBPF
> program access to ma
Hi All,
one more RFC...
Major difference vs previous set is a new 'load 64-bit immediate' eBPF insn.
Which is first 16-byte instruction. It shows how eBPF ISA can be extended
while maintaining backward compatibility, but mainly it cleans up eBPF
program access to maps and improves run-time perfor
10 matches
Mail list logo
