On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 03:32:22PM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > And I would strongly recommend to change the calling conventions of that
> > thing - make it return __sum16. And take __sum16 as well...
> >
> > Again, exposing __wsum to anything that looks like a stable ABI is
> > a mistake -
On 11/13/20 3:15 PM, Al Viro wrote:
On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 02:22:16PM +0100, Björn Töpel wrote:
Folding Al's input to this reply.
I think the bpf_csum_diff() is supposed to be used in combination with
another helper(s) (e.g. bpf_l4_csum_replace) so I'd guess the returned
__wsum should be seen
On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 02:22:16PM +0100, Björn Töpel wrote:
> Folding Al's input to this reply.
>
> I think the bpf_csum_diff() is supposed to be used in combination with
> another helper(s) (e.g. bpf_l4_csum_replace) so I'd guess the returned
> __wsum should be seen as an opaque value, not some
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 at 13:25, Jean-Philippe Brucker
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 11:36:08AM +0100, Björn Töpel wrote:
> > I was running the selftest/bpf on riscv, and had a closer look at one
> > of the failing cases:
> >
> > #14/p valid read map access into a read-only array 2 FAI
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 at 12:34, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/13/20 11:36 AM, Björn Töpel wrote:
> > I was running the selftest/bpf on riscv, and had a closer look at one
> > of the failing cases:
> >
> > #14/p valid read map access into a read-only array 2 FAIL retval
> > 65507 != -29 (run 1/
On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 11:36:08AM +0100, Björn Töpel wrote:
> I was running the selftest/bpf on riscv, and had a closer look at one
> of the failing cases:
>
> #14/p valid read map access into a read-only array 2 FAIL retval
> 65507 != -29 (run 1/1)
>
> The test does a csum_partial() call via
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 11:36:08AM +0100, Björn Töpel wrote:
> I was running the selftest/bpf on riscv, and had a closer look at one
> of the failing cases:
>
> #14/p valid read map access into a read-only array 2 FAIL retval
> 65507 != -29 (run 1/1)
>
> The test does a csum_partial() call
On 11/13/20 11:36 AM, Björn Töpel wrote:
> I was running the selftest/bpf on riscv, and had a closer look at one
> of the failing cases:
>
> #14/p valid read map access into a read-only array 2 FAIL retval
> 65507 != -29 (run 1/1)
>
> The test does a csum_partial() call via a BPF helper. ris
I was running the selftest/bpf on riscv, and had a closer look at one
of the failing cases:
#14/p valid read map access into a read-only array 2 FAIL retval
65507 != -29 (run 1/1)
The test does a csum_partial() call via a BPF helper. riscv uses the
generic implementation. arm64 uses the generic
