On Wed, Nov 2, 2022 at 3:18 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 5:13 PM Song Liu <song@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 3:17 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > IIUC we want something like below to access sample data directly, > > > right? > > > > > > BPF_CORE_READ(ctx, data, ip); > > > > > > > I haven't tried this, but I guess we may need something like > > > > data = ctx->data; > > BPF_CORE_READ(data, ip); > > Ok, will try. > > > > > > Some fields like raw and callchains will have variable length data > > > so it'd be hard to check the boundary at load time. > > > > I think we are fine as long as we can check boundaries at run time. > > Sure, that means it's the responsibility of BPF writers, right? Right, the author of the BPF program could check whether the data is valid. Song > > > > > > Also it's possible > > > that some fields are not set (according to sample type), and it'd be > > > the user's (or programmer's) responsibility to check if the data is > > > valid. If these are not the concerns, I think I'm good. > > > > So we still need 1/3 of the set to make sure the data is valid? > > Of course, I'll keep it in the v2. > > Thanks, > Namhyung
