On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 6:59 AM Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The current way of expressing that a non-bpf kernel component is willing > to accept that bpf programs can be attached to it and that they can change > the return value is to abuse ALLOW_ERROR_INJECTION. > This is debated in the link below, and the result is that it is not a > reasonable thing to do. > > Reuse the kfunc declaration structure to also tag the kernel functions > we want to be fmodret. This way we can control from any subsystem which > functions are being modified by bpf without touching the verifier. > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221121104403.1545f9b5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > Suggested-by: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx> BPF CI couldn't do its job because of a merge conflict. CI only tries to apply the whole series. But I tested the patch 1 manually. Everything is green on x86-64 and the patch looks good. Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx> Please send the set during the merge window. If not we can take just this patch, since the series from Viktor Malik would need this patch too.
