Re: [Patch bpf-next 0/3] bpf: introduce timeout map

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 2:25 PM Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 11:55 AM Andrii Nakryiko
> <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 2:28 AM Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Cong Wang <cong.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > This patchset introduces a new bpf hash map which has timeout.
> > > Patch 1 is a preparation, patch 2 is the implementation of timeout
> > > map, patch 3 contains a test case for timeout map. Please check each
> > > patch description for more details.
> > >
> > > ---
> >
> > This patch set seems to be breaking existing selftests. Please take a
> > look ([0]).
>
> Interesting, looks unrelated to my patches but let me double check.

Cc'ing Andrey...

Looks like the failure is due to the addition of a new member to struct
htab_elem. Any reason why it is hard-coded as 64 in check_hash()?
And what's the point of verifying its size? htab_elem should be only
visible to the kernel itself.

I can certainly change 64 to whatever its new size is, but I do wonder
why the test is there.

Thanks.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux