On Tue, 2019-06-04 at 02:43 +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 06/04/2019 01:54 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:48 PM Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > > On 06/04/2019 01:27 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 3:59 PM Matt Mullins wrote:
> > > > >
>
On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 5:44 PM Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>
> On 06/04/2019 01:54 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:48 PM Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> >> On 06/04/2019 01:27 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 3:59 PM Matt Mullins wrote:
>
> If
On 06/04/2019 01:54 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:48 PM Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 06/04/2019 01:27 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 3:59 PM Matt Mullins wrote:
If these are invariably non-nested, I can easily keep bpf_misc_sd when
On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:48 PM Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>
> On 06/04/2019 01:27 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 3:59 PM Matt Mullins wrote:
> >>
> >> If these are invariably non-nested, I can easily keep bpf_misc_sd when
> >> I resubmit. There was no technical reason
On 06/04/2019 01:27 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 3:59 PM Matt Mullins wrote:
>>
>> If these are invariably non-nested, I can easily keep bpf_misc_sd when
>> I resubmit. There was no technical reason other than keeping the two
>> codepaths as similar as possible.
>>
>>
On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 3:59 PM Matt Mullins wrote:
>
> If these are invariably non-nested, I can easily keep bpf_misc_sd when
> I resubmit. There was no technical reason other than keeping the two
> codepaths as similar as possible.
>
> What resource gives you worry about doing this for the
On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 15:22 +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 06/03/2019 03:08 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > On 06/01/2019 12:37 AM, Matt Mullins wrote:
> > > It is possible that a BPF program can be called while another BPF
> > > program is executing bpf_perf_event_output. This has been
On 06/03/2019 03:08 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 06/01/2019 12:37 AM, Matt Mullins wrote:
>> It is possible that a BPF program can be called while another BPF
>> program is executing bpf_perf_event_output. This has been observed with
>> I/O completion occurring as a result of an interrupt:
>>
On 06/01/2019 12:37 AM, Matt Mullins wrote:
> It is possible that a BPF program can be called while another BPF
> program is executing bpf_perf_event_output. This has been observed with
> I/O completion occurring as a result of an interrupt:
>
>
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 6:28 PM Song Liu wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 31, 2019, at 3:37 PM, Matt Mullins wrote:
> >
> > It is possible that a BPF program can be called while another BPF
> > program is executing bpf_perf_event_output. This has been observed with
> > I/O completion occurring as a
> On May 31, 2019, at 3:37 PM, Matt Mullins wrote:
>
> It is possible that a BPF program can be called while another BPF
> program is executing bpf_perf_event_output. This has been observed with
> I/O completion occurring as a result of an interrupt:
>
>
It is possible that a BPF program can be called while another BPF
program is executing bpf_perf_event_output. This has been observed with
I/O completion occurring as a result of an interrupt:
bpf_prog_247fd1341cddaea4_trace_req_end+0x8d7/0x1000
? trace_call_bpf+0x82/0x100
12 matches
Mail list logo