On 4/9/18 3:01 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
On 04/09/2018 07:02 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 4/8/18 9:53 PM, Yonghong Song wrote:
@@ -1004,7 +1007,8 @@ static void __bpf_prog_put(struct bpf_prog
*prog, bool do_idr_lock)
bpf_prog_kallsyms_del(prog->aux->func[i]);
On 04/09/2018 07:02 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On 4/8/18 9:53 PM, Yonghong Song wrote:
@@ -1004,7 +1007,8 @@ static void __bpf_prog_put(struct bpf_prog
*prog, bool do_idr_lock)
bpf_prog_kallsyms_del(prog->aux->func[i]);
bpf_prog_kallsyms_del(prog);
On 4/8/18 9:53 PM, Yonghong Song wrote:
@@ -1004,7 +1007,8 @@ static void __bpf_prog_put(struct bpf_prog
*prog, bool do_idr_lock)
bpf_prog_kallsyms_del(prog->aux->func[i]);
bpf_prog_kallsyms_del(prog);
-call_rcu(>aux->rcu, __bpf_prog_put_rcu);
+
On 4/8/18 8:34 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 4/6/18 2:48 PM, Yonghong Song wrote:
Currently, stackmap and bpf_get_stackid helper are provided
for bpf program to get the stack trace. This approach has
a limitation though. If two stack traces have the same hash,
only one will get stored in
On 4/6/18 2:48 PM, Yonghong Song wrote:
Currently, stackmap and bpf_get_stackid helper are provided
for bpf program to get the stack trace. This approach has
a limitation though. If two stack traces have the same hash,
only one will get stored in the stackmap table,
so some stack traces are
Currently, stackmap and bpf_get_stackid helper are provided
for bpf program to get the stack trace. This approach has
a limitation though. If two stack traces have the same hash,
only one will get stored in the stackmap table,
so some stack traces are missing from user perspective.
This patch
