On 2/5/25 10:56 PM, Jason Xing wrote:
I have to rephrase a bit in case Martin visits here soon: I will
compare two approaches 1) reply value, 2) bpf kfunc and then see which
way is better.
I have already explained in details why the 1) reply value from the bpf prog
won't work. Please go back to that reply which has the context.
Yes, of course I saw this, but I said I need to implement and dig more
into this on my own. One of my replies includes a little code snippet
regarding reply value approach. I didn't expect you to misunderstand
that I would choose reply value, so I rephrase it like above :)
I did see the code snippet which is incomplete, so I have to guess. afaik, it is
not going to work. I was hoping to save some time without detouring to the
reply-value path in case my earlier message was missed. I will stay quiet and
wait for v9 first then to avoid extending this long thread further.
