On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Daniel Borkmann via llvm-dev < [email protected]> wrote:
> On 06/16/2016 10:59 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: > >> On 06/16/2016 12:55 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: >> >>> + EM_BPF = 0xeb9f, // Linux kernel bpf virtual machine >>>>>> >>>>> >>> Great, can that be assumed the final magic e_machine number for the ELF >>> header that eBPF loaders can check for as well then (I do like 0xeb9f >>> ;))? >>> >> >> I'm quite fond of 0xeb9f myself. ;-) >> >> I have sent a message to both [email protected] and [email protected] >> . >> We'll see if that produces a response within a reasonable time frame. >> Failing >> that, I'm tempted to just use 0xeb9f forever. >> > > Yeah, sounds good! I got a response from [email protected] ([email protected] forwards to there I believe). It took about 6 months to get a number assigned.
_______________________________________________ iovisor-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.iovisor.org/mailman/listinfo/iovisor-dev
