On Thu, Aug 08, 2024 at 09:51:34AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > The bpf changes look ok and Andrii's approach is easier to grasp. > It's better to route bpf conversion to CLASS(fd,..) via bpf-next, > so it goes through bpf CI and our other testing. > > bpf patches don't seem to depend on newly added CLASS(fd_pos, ... > and fderr, so pretty much independent from other patches. Representation change and switch to accessors do matter, though. OTOH, I can put just those into never-rebased branch (basically, "introduce fd_file(), convert all accessors to it" + "struct fd representation change" + possibly "add struct fd constructors, get rid of __to_fd()", for completeness sake), so you could pull it. Otherwise you'll get textual conflicts on all those f.file vs. fd_file(f)...
