From: Alexei Starovoitov
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 18:58:00 -0700
> i don't think it will apply to anything but net-next. If it goes any
> other tree we will have major conflicts during merge window.
> btw I haven't reviewed them for the second time.
Ok, then I'll need to seem some ACKs from the tr
On 10/31/17 6:55 PM, David Miller wrote:
From: Josef Bacik
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:45:55 -0400
v1->v2:
- moved things around to make sure that bpf_override_return could really only be
used for an ftrace kprobe.
- killed the special return values from trace_call_bpf.
- renamed pc_modified t
From: Josef Bacik
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:45:55 -0400
> v1->v2:
> - moved things around to make sure that bpf_override_return could really only
> be
> used for an ftrace kprobe.
> - killed the special return values from trace_call_bpf.
> - renamed pc_modified to bpf_kprobe_state so bpf_overr
v1->v2:
- moved things around to make sure that bpf_override_return could really only be
used for an ftrace kprobe.
- killed the special return values from trace_call_bpf.
- renamed pc_modified to bpf_kprobe_state so bpf_override_return could tell if
it was being called from an ftrace kprobe co
