Re: [Bpf] [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf, docs: Add callx instructions in new conformance group

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

 



> +BPF_CALL  0x8    0x1  call PC += reg_val(imm)          BPF_JMP | BPF_X only, see `Program-local functions`_

If the instruction requires a register operand, why not using one of the
register fields?  Is there any reason for not doing that?

-- 
Bpf mailing list
Bpf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bpf




[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