Thread (120 messages) 120 messages, 12 authors, 2020-05-13

Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/4] xdp: Support specifying expected existing program when attaching XDP

From: Alexei Starovoitov <hidden>
Date: 2020-03-26 19:40:58
Also in: bpf

On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 10:13:23PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
quoted
Now for XDP. It has same flawed model. And even if it seems to you
that it's not a big issue, and even if Jakub thinks we are trying to
solve non-existing problem, it is a real problem and a real concern
from people that have to support XDP in production with many
More than happy to talk to those folks, and see the tickets.
Jakub, you repeatedly demonstrated lack of understanding of what
bpf_link is despite multiple attempts from me, Andrii and others.
At this point I don't believe in your good intent.
Your repeated attacks on BPF in every thread are out of control.
I kept ignoring your insults for long time, but I cannot do this anymore.
Please find other threads to contribute your opinions.
They are not welcomed here.
quoted
well-meaning developers developing BPF applications independently.
There is one single program which can be attached to the XDP hook, 
the "everybody attaches their program model" does not apply.

TW agent should just listen on netlink notifications to see if someone
replaced its program.
This is dumbest idea I've heard in a long time.
May be kernel shouldn't have done ACLs and did notifications only
when file is accessed by a task that shouldn't have accessed it?
Same level of craziness.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help