From: Daniel Borkmann <dan...@iogearbox.net> Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 21:41:33 +0200
> On 10/22/2017 03:09 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: >> On 10/22/2017 02:57 PM, David Miller wrote: >>> >>> There were quite a few BPF conflicts during the merge I just did of >>> 'net' into 'net-next'. >>> >>> In particular, all of the packet pointer branch tests in the verifier >>> had to be resolved wrt. three different sets of changes. >>> >>> The off-by-one stuff. The allowance of the 'data_end > ptr + x' form >>> of packet pointer checks. And finally, the metadata stuff. >>> >>> I would really appreciate an audit and double check of my merge work >>> by the interested parties. >> >> I will do a review today in the evening, thanks David! > > Looks good overall, I notices two things (in find_good_pkt_pointers() > in the second loop the max_t(u16, ...) still exists instead of just > max() in -net and in test_verifier the test cases for 'XDP pkt read' > are split in the middle with other test cases for bpf_exit). I'll send > a cleanup on Monday for this along with the matches for metadata part. Thanks for taking a look, I was slightly stumped by the max_t() and decided to keep it in the merge. If both arms of the operation are u16 then indeed it isn't necessary. Thanks again!
