From: Alexei Starovoitov <redacted>
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2017 23:44:59 -0700

On 4/29/17 7:37 PM, David Miller wrote:

quoted

BTW, should I just remove tailcall from the opcode table altogether?

yeah. tailcall is not a special opcode from user space point of view.
Only after normal call with func_id=bpf_tail_call passes verifier
then verifier will change insn->code into CALL|X
It's done only to have two 'case' statement in the interpreter,
so that normal calls and tailcalls don't interfere.
From user space pov CALL|X opcode is reserved and we can use it
for something in the future. Just need to change interpeter and JITs.

Ok, I've removed it from my tree.

Thanks.