On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 21:41:22 +, Yonghong Song wrote:
> > func2 after func adjust will start at off and there is no line info for
> > off + cnt (insn4), so we will preserve line_info2.
>
> Thanks for verification, I missed that
> >>> +/* count lines to be removed */
> >>> +l
On 12/31/18 12:31 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 22:02:10 +, Yonghong Song wrote:
>> On 12/28/18 7:09 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>> +static int bpf_adj_linfo_after_remove(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32
>>> off,
>>> + u32 cnt)
>>> +{
>>> +
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 22:02:10 +, Yonghong Song wrote:
> On 12/28/18 7:09 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > +static int bpf_adj_linfo_after_remove(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32
> > off,
> > + u32 cnt)
> > +{
> > + struct bpf_subprog_info *need_first_linfo;
> > +
On 12/28/18 7:09 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Instead of overwriting dead code with jmp -1 instructions
> remove it completely for root. Adjust verifier state and
> line info appropriately.
>
> v2:
> - adjust func_info (Alexei);
> - make sure first instruction retains line info (Alexei).
>
Instead of overwriting dead code with jmp -1 instructions
remove it completely for root. Adjust verifier state and
line info appropriately.
v2:
- adjust func_info (Alexei);
- make sure first instruction retains line info (Alexei).
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski
---
include/linux/filter.h |
