On 03/13/2015 05:22 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 3/13/15 2:57 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
On 03/13/2015 03:21 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
introduce user accessible mirror of in-kernel 'struct sk_buff':
For each member, I'd also add BUILD_BUG_ON()s similarly as we have in
convert_bpf_extensions(). That way, people won't forget to adjust the
code.
I thought about it, but didn't add it, since we already have them
in the same file several lines above this spot.
I think one build error per .c file should be enough to attract
attention.
Though I'll add a comment to convert_bpf_extensions() that build_bug_on
errors should be addressed in two places.
My concern would be that in case the code gets changed, this spot
could easily be overlooked by someone possibly unfamiliar with the
code, since no build error triggers there.
So I guess it wouldn't hurt or cost us much to also adding the
BUILD_BUG_ON()s there instead of a comment.
...
The remaining fields we export in classic BPF would be skb->hash,
skb->protocol, skb->vlan_tci, are we adding them as well to match
up functionality with classic BPF? For example, I can see hash being
useful as a key to be used with eBPF maps, etc.
I want to do skb->protocol and skb->vlan_tci differently and hopefully
more generically than classic did them, so they will come in the
follow on patches. skb->hash also should be done differently.
So yes. All of them are subjects of future patches/discussions.
Ok, sounds good.
Thanks,
Daniel
--
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
