[PATCH net 0/3] BPF pruning follow-up · Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> · 2017-05-23
[PATCH net 2/3] bpf: properly reset caller saved regs after helper call and ld_abs/ind · Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> · 2017-05-23
[PATCH net 3/3] bpf: add various verifier test cases · Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> · 2017-05-23
[PATCH net 1/3] bpf: fix incorrect pruning decision when alignment must be tracked · Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> · 2017-05-23
Re: [PATCH net 1/3] bpf: fix incorrect pruning decision when alignment must be tracked · David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> · 2017-05-24
Re: [PATCH net 1/3] bpf: fix incorrect pruning decision when alignment must be tracked · Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> · 2017-05-24

Re: [PATCH net 1/3] bpf: fix incorrect pruning decision when alignment must be tracked

From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Date: 2017-05-24 20:07:35

From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 18:30:41 +0200

+	if (!env->strict_alignment && old->off <= cur->off &&

You can't just test env->strict_alignment by itself, that's just an
override and doesn't determine the actual "strict" value we use which
is a combination of env->strict_alignment and
"!CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS".

So you'll have to update this test.

`h`	back out one level
`j`	next message in thread
`k`	previous message in thread
`l`	drill in
`Esc`	close help / fold thread tree
`?`	toggle this help