On Fri, 13 Jan 2023, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > Hi, > > So this is the fix for the bug that actually prevented me to integrate > HID-BPF in v6.2. > > While testing the code base with LLVM, I realized that clang was smarter > than I expected it to be, and it sometimes inlined a function or not > depending on the branch. This lead to segfaults because my current code > in linux-next is messing up the bpf programs refcounts assuming that I > had enough observability over the kernel. > > So I came back to the drawing board and realized that what I was missing > was exactly a bpf_link, to represent the attachment of a bpf program to > a HID device. This is the bulk of the series, in patch 6/9. > > The other patches are cleanups, tests, and also the addition of the > vmtests.sh script I run locally, largely inspired by the one in the bpf > selftests dir. This allows very fast development of HID-BPF, assuming we > have tests that cover the bugs :) > > > changes in v2: > - took Alexei's remarks into account and renamed the indexes into > prog_table_index and hid_table_index > - fixed unused function as reported by the Intel kbuild bot I've now applied this on top of the previous work in hid.git#for-6.3/hid-bpf -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs
