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;
> > +
>
> [...]
