Just checking if there is any more feedback on this patch set, as I've seen no comments since this set was posted on October 4th which addresses comments received on the previous submission. Let me know if I'm missing some step I should be doing as I'm new to this submission process. Thanks! Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: dthaler1968@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <dthaler1968@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2022 3:48 PM > To: bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: Dave Thaler <dthaler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: [PATCH 1/9] bpf, docs: Add note about type convention > > From: Dave Thaler <dthaler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Add note about type convention > > Signed-off-by: Dave Thaler <dthaler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/bpf/instruction-set.rst | 7 +++++++ > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/instruction-set.rst > b/Documentation/bpf/instruction-set.rst > index 4997d2088..6847a4cbf 100644 > --- a/Documentation/bpf/instruction-set.rst > +++ b/Documentation/bpf/instruction-set.rst > @@ -7,6 +7,11 @@ eBPF Instruction Set Specification, v1.0 > > This document specifies version 1.0 of the eBPF instruction set. > > +Documentation conventions > +========================= > + > +For brevity, this document uses the type notion "u64", "u32", etc. > +to mean an unsigned integer whose width is the specified number of bits. > > Registers and calling convention > ================================ > @@ -116,6 +121,8 @@ BPF_END 0xd0 byte swap operations (see `Byte swap > instructions`_ below) > > dst_reg = (u32) dst_reg + (u32) src_reg; > > +where '(u32)' indicates truncation to 32 bits. > + > ``BPF_ADD | BPF_X | BPF_ALU64`` means:: > > dst_reg = dst_reg + src_reg > -- > 2.33.4
