Re: [RFC][PATCH bpf v2 1/2] bpf: allow 64-bit offsets for bpf function calls

Am Thu, 22 Feb 2018 13:06:40 +0100 schrieb Michael Holzheu : > Am Fri, 16 Feb 2018 21:20:09 +0530 > schrieb "Naveen N. Rao" : > > > Daniel Borkmann wrote: > > > On 02/15/2018 05:25 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > > >> On 02/13/2018 05:05

Re: [RFC][PATCH bpf v2 1/2] bpf: allow 64-bit offsets for bpf function calls

Am Fri, 16 Feb 2018 21:20:09 +0530 schrieb "Naveen N. Rao" : > Daniel Borkmann wrote: > > On 02/15/2018 05:25 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > >> On 02/13/2018 05:05 AM, Sandipan Das wrote: > >>> The imm field of a bpf_insn is a signed 32-bit integer. For > >>> JIT-ed

Re: [RFC][PATCH bpf v2 1/2] bpf: allow 64-bit offsets for bpf function calls

Michael Ellerman wrote: "Naveen N. Rao" writes: Daniel Borkmann wrote: On 02/15/2018 05:25 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: On 02/13/2018 05:05 AM, Sandipan Das wrote: The imm field of a bpf_insn is a signed 32-bit integer. For JIT-ed bpf-to-bpf function calls, it

Re: [RFC][PATCH bpf v2 1/2] bpf: allow 64-bit offsets for bpf function calls

"Naveen N. Rao" writes: > Daniel Borkmann wrote: >> On 02/15/2018 05:25 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: >>> On 02/13/2018 05:05 AM, Sandipan Das wrote: The imm field of a bpf_insn is a signed 32-bit integer. For JIT-ed bpf-to-bpf function calls, it stores the

Re: [RFC][PATCH bpf v2 1/2] bpf: allow 64-bit offsets for bpf function calls

Daniel Borkmann wrote: On 02/15/2018 05:25 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: On 02/13/2018 05:05 AM, Sandipan Das wrote: The imm field of a bpf_insn is a signed 32-bit integer. For JIT-ed bpf-to-bpf function calls, it stores the offset from __bpf_call_base to the start of the callee function. For

Re: [RFC][PATCH bpf v2 1/2] bpf: allow 64-bit offsets for bpf function calls

On 02/15/2018 05:25 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > On 02/13/2018 05:05 AM, Sandipan Das wrote: >> The imm field of a bpf_insn is a signed 32-bit integer. For >> JIT-ed bpf-to-bpf function calls, it stores the offset from >> __bpf_call_base to the start of the callee function. >> >> For some

Re: [RFC][PATCH bpf v2 1/2] bpf: allow 64-bit offsets for bpf function calls

On 02/13/2018 05:05 AM, Sandipan Das wrote: > The imm field of a bpf_insn is a signed 32-bit integer. For > JIT-ed bpf-to-bpf function calls, it stores the offset from > __bpf_call_base to the start of the callee function. > > For some architectures, such as powerpc64, it was found that > this

[RFC][PATCH bpf v2 1/2] bpf: allow 64-bit offsets for bpf function calls

The imm field of a bpf_insn is a signed 32-bit integer. For JIT-ed bpf-to-bpf function calls, it stores the offset from __bpf_call_base to the start of the callee function. For some architectures, such as powerpc64, it was found that this offset may be as large as 64 bits because of which this