From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 22:17:16 -0700 > V9->V10 > - no changes, added Daniel's ack > > Note they're on top of Hannes's patch in the same area [1] > > V8 thread with 'why' reasoning and end goal [2] > > Original set [3] of ~28 patches I'm planning to present in 4 stages: > > I. this 2 patches to fork off llvm upstreaming > II. bpf syscall with manpage and map implementation > III. bpf program load/unload with verifier testsuite (1st user of > instruction macros from bpf.h and 1st user of load imm64 insn) > IV. tracing, etc > > [1] http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/385266/ > [2] https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/27/628 > [3] https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/26/859 Begrudgingly, I've applied this series. Although I really wish you had included the mechanism for userland to use the eBPF instructions alongside exporting them to userspace. You kept saying "LLVM is the user" but that's a bullshit argument because you aren't including the patches necessary to actually propagate native eBPF programs into the kernel. That's what, 1 or 2 patches, right? Which is not an unreasonable request. Anyways, I'm just extremely frustrated with how you operate and work, you push things way too hard. I hate to say this, but you are the kind of submitter who gets his way by being persistent rather than making well formed pleasant submissions that are easy to integrate. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
