On 03-Mär 20:49, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 5:56 PM KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > From: KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > As we need to introduce a third type of attachment for trampolines, the > > flattened signature of arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline gets even more > > complicated. > > > > Refactor the prog and count argument to arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline to > > use bpf_tramp_progs to simplify the addition and accounting for new > > attachment types. > > > > Signed-off-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > See note about const-ification of trampoline and naming suggestion, > but looks good overall: > > Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@xxxxxx> > > > +static struct bpf_tramp_progs * > > +bpf_trampoline_update_progs(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, int *total) > > reading the code again, seems like bpf_trampoline_update_progs is > really more like bpf_trampoline_get_progs, no? It doesn't modify > trampoline itself, so might as well mark tr as const pointer. Makes sense. I will send a v3 with these some minor fixes by EOD ZRH. - KP > > > > +{ > > + struct bpf_tramp_progs *tprogs; > > + struct bpf_prog **progs; > > + struct bpf_prog_aux *aux; > > + int kind; > > + > > [...]