Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/2] bpf: allow extended BPF programs access skb fields

[Alexei Starovoitov]

On 3/13/15 7:27 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On 3/13/15 7:16 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > On 03/14/2015 03:08 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > On 3/13/15 7:06 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > > > On 03/14/2015 02:46 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > > > Previously, it was much more consistent, which I like better. And only
> > > > > because of the simple BUILD_BUG_ON()? :/
> > > >
> > > > Alternative is to move all of them into a central place, something like
> > > > in twsk_build_assert() or __mld2_query_bugs[].
> > >
> > > nope. that defeats the purpose of bug_on.
> >
> > Well, it doesn't. ;) It throws a build error thus the user is forced to
> > investigate that further.
>
> according to this distorted logic all build_bug_on can be in one file
> across the whole tree, since 'user is forced to investigate' ?!

also note that this case and twsk_build_assert are different.
twsk_build_assert has no other choice then to have one function
that covers logic in the whole file, whereas in this patch:
+               BUILD_BUG_ON(FIELD_SIZEOF(struct sk_buff, mark) != 4);
+               *insn++ = BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, dst_reg, src_reg,
+                                     offsetof(struct sk_buff, mark));

the build_bug_on protect the line directly below.
Separating them just doesn't make sense at all.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/