Alexei wrote: > > Based on the discussion at LPC, and the fact that older > > implementations, as well as uBPF and rbpf still terminate the program, > > I've added this text to permit both behaviors: > > That's not right. ubpf and rbpf are broken. > We shouldn't be adding descriptions of broken implementations to the > standard. > There is no way to 'gracefully abort' in eBPF. Just had a discussion with one of the ubpf maintainers (Alan, who was in the office-hours-slot standardization meeting) who agreed that ubpf should be fixed, so will update to remove that. Dave
