On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 05:43:50PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 08:46:14AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 10:16:14PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 9:54 PM Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > -static bool is_dynptr_reg_valid_init(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_reg_state *reg,
> > > > > - enum bpf_arg_type arg_type)
> > > > > +bool is_dynptr_reg_valid_init(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_reg_state *reg,
> > > > > + enum bpf_arg_type arg_type)
> > > > > {
> > > > > struct bpf_func_state *state = func(env, reg);
> > > > > int spi = get_spi(reg->off);
> > > > > --
> > > > > 2.25.1
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Might be niticking but generally I'd consider splitting
> > > > exports as commits of their own.
> > >
> > > -static bool
> > > +bool
> > >
> > > into a separate commit?
> > >
> > > I guess it makes sense for people whose salary depends on
> > > number of commits.
> > > We don't play these games.
> >
> > What kind of argument is that anyway.
>
> "Separate each *logical change* into a separate patch." [*]
>
> To add, generally any user space visible space should be an
~~~~~
change
BR, Jarkko
