[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [REGRESSION][PATCH V4 3/3] bpf jit: Let the powerpc jit handle negative offsets
Benjamin Herrenschmidt schrieb:
> On Mon, 2012-04-30 at 06:27 +0200, Jan Seiffert wrote:
>> Benjamin Herrenschmidt schrieb:
>>> On Mon, 2012-04-30 at 12:43 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>>>> Matt's having a look at powerpc
>>>> Ok, he hasn't so I'll dig a bit.
>>>> No obvious wrongness (but I'm not very familiar with bpf), though I do
>>>> have a comment: sk_negative_common() and bpf_slow_path_common() should
>>>> be made one and single macro which takes the fallback function as an
>>>> argument.
>>> Ok, with the compile fix below it seems to work for me:
>>> (Feel free to fold that into the original patch)
>> Should i resend the complete patch with the compile fix?
> Won't hurt...


> BTW. Any idea about that bpf_program vs. sock_fprog issue I mentioned
> earlier ?

No idea, i was going by the old saying:
"Thou shall not include kernel header, or you will feel the wrath of angry
kernel gurus."

> Cheers,
> Ben.


The OO-Hype keeps on spinning, C stays.

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-30 07:21    [W:0.101 / U:4.008 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site