On 4/29/24 8:56 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 11:49:39 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote:+u64 __weak bpf_arch_uaddress_limit(void) +{ +#if defined(CONFIG_64BIT) && defined(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NON_OVERLAPPING_ADDRESS_SPACE) + return TASK_SIZE; +#else + return 0; +#endif +} + + bool __weak bpf_jit_supports_insn(struct bpf_insn *insn, bool in_arena) + { + return false; + }Thanks! FTR I plan to used the inverse order, if that matters..
Yeap, that looks cleaner, same for the signature in the header given the others prefixed with bpf_jit_supports_*. Thanks, Daniel
