On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 3:27 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 06/11/2014 03:22 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 3:18 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On 06/11/2014 02:56 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>>> >>>> 13ns is with the simplest nonempty filter. I hope that empty filters >>>> don't work. >>>> >>> >>> Why wouldn't they? >> >> Is it permissible to fall off the end of a BPF program? I'm getting >> EINVAL trying to install an actual empty filter. The filter I tested >> with was: >> > > What I meant was that there has to be a well-defined behavior for the > program falling off the end anyway, and that that should be preserved. > > I guess it is possible to require that all code paths must provably > reach a termination point. > Dunno. I haven't ever touched any of the actual BPF code. This whole patchset only changes the code that invokes the BPF evaluator. --Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
