Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, docs: Clarify definitions of various instructions

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 1/25/24 8:00 PM, Dave Thaler wrote:
Clarify definitions of several instructions:
* BPF_NEG does not support BPF_X
* BPF_CALL does not support BPF_JMP32 or BPF_X
* BPF_EXIT does not support BPF_X
* BPF_JA does not support BPF_X (was implied but not explicitly stated)

Also fix a typo in the wide instruction figure where
the field is actually named "opcode" not "code".

Signed-off-by: Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@xxxxxxxxx>

Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@xxxxxxxxx>





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux