Thread (10 messages) 10 messages, 3 authors, 2020-05-26

Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] bpf: Allow inner map with different max_entries

From: Martin KaFai Lau <hidden>
Date: 2020-05-22 00:07:08
Also in: bpf

On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 04:16:18PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 04:10:36PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
4. Then for size check change, again, it's really much simpler and
cleaner just to have a special case in check in bpf_map_meta_equal for
cases where map size matters.
It may be simpler but not necessary less fragile for future map type.

I am OK for removing patch 1 and just check for a specific
type in patch 2 but I think it is fragile for future map
type IMO.
Well, if we think that the good default needs to be to check size,
then similar to above, explicitly list stuff that *does not* follow
the default, i.e., maps that don't want max_elements verification. My
point still stands.
I think consoldating map properties in bpf_types.h is much cleaner
and less error prone.
I'd only like to tweak the macro in patch 1 to avoid explicit ", 0)".
Can BPF_MAP_TYPE() macro stay as-is and additional macro introduced
for maps with properties ? BPF_MAP_TYPE_FL() ?
Or do some macro magic that the same macro can be used with 2 and 3 args?
I will give it a try to minimize the code churn.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help