On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 10:13 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 03:12:13PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 12:00 PM Song Liu <song@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 8:45 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > Currenty lsm uses bpf_tracing_func_proto helpers which do > > > > not include stack trace or perf event output. It's useful > > > > to have those for bpftrace lsm support [1]. > > > > > > > > Using tracing_prog_func_proto helpers for lsm programs. > > > > > > How about using raw_tp_prog_func_proto? > > > > why? > > I think skb/xdp_output is useful for lsm progs too. > > So I've applied the patch. > > right, it's also where d_path will be as well > > > > > > PS: Please tag the patch with subject prefix "PATCH bpf" for > > > "PATCH bpf-next". I think this one belongs to bpf-next, which means > > > we should wait after the merge window. > > I must have missed info about that, > thanks for info Thanks for adding this! LGTM as well. - KP > > > > > +1. > > Jiri, > > pls tag the subject properly. > > will do, sry > > thanks, > jirka >
