> -----Original Message----- > From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Friday, July 28, 2023 9:52 PM > To: Will Hawkins <hawkinsw@xxxxxx> > Cc: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@xxxxxxxxx>; Dave Thaler > <dthaler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; bpf@xxxxxxxx; bpf <bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [Bpf] Review of draft-thaler-bpf-isa-01 > > On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 8:14 PM Will Hawkins <hawkinsw@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > The Appendix (the opcode table) is not in the kernel repo now and > > still has the issues that I outlined above. Suggestions (especially concrete changes) welcome :) > Will that make it in to > > the kernel? [...] > I thought it's auto generated, so it should be easy to update. It's not yet auto generated, and some parts are hard to auto-generated because the combinations are just in English text. > If not, let's certainly bring it in. At the IETF BPF WG meeting, folks seemed agnostic as to whether it was brought into the Linux repo or not. See recording at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTtPbJqfYwI at 1:15:30 - 1:17:30, and Christoph was the only one who spoke up, preferring to just keep a static copy of the Internet Draft in the kernel repository. I interpreted this as saying no one cared about having the IANA considerations section in a separate file there. But we confirm consensus on the list, so it's fine to revisit now if there are good reasons to do so. > I suspect it will be the seed for IANA. > Dave, thoughts? That's the intent, yes. Per RFC 8126, the Internet Draft has the "initial" contents of the registry at time of publication, after which IANA becomes the authoritative place going forward since one cannot change the RFC itself. Dave
