From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxx> Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2017 23:44:59 -0700 > On 4/29/17 7:37 PM, David Miller wrote: >> BTW, should I just remove tailcall from the opcode table altogether? > > yeah. tailcall is not a special opcode from user space point of view. > Only after normal call with func_id=bpf_tail_call passes verifier > then verifier will change insn->code into CALL|X > It's done only to have two 'case' statement in the interpreter, > so that normal calls and tailcalls don't interfere. > From user space pov CALL|X opcode is reserved and we can use it > for something in the future. Just need to change interpeter and JITs. Ok, I've removed it from my tree. Thanks.
|