On 07/07/17 10:14, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > But this means the bpf_lxc_* cases increase quite significantly, > arguably one of them is pretty close already, but the other one not > so much, meaning while 142k would shoot over the 128k target quite a > bit, the 95k is quite close to the point that it wouldn't take much, > say, few different optimizations from compiler, to hit the limit as > well eventually, something like 156k for the time being would seem a > more adequate raise perhaps that needs to be evaluated carefully > given the situation. Note that the numbers in my table are the _sum_ of all the progs in the object file, not the #insns for a single program. (Hence the awk invocation in my pipeline.) For instance in bpf_lxc_opt_-DUNKNOWN.o on net-next there were (iirc) a couple of 30k progs and then some smaller ones, not a single 93k prog.
-Ed
