From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BD0BC433E2 for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 18:07:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F257920936 for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 18:07:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="ejQlfQPc" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727955AbgIOSHU (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Sep 2020 14:07:20 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39338 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728000AbgIOSCg (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Sep 2020 14:02:36 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-x241.google.com (mail-lj1-x241.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::241]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD1F6C06178A; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 11:02:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x241.google.com with SMTP id y4so3621883ljk.8; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 11:02:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=LzBv6m1vPIL7/RF8uYFkuOR2dwzIsUMdUh6iBcqPluI=; b=ejQlfQPcLifvN49urcdE4CMTzVJFXphkZdhL3jg/MjKwpaHywIma22I996/7Lj6Dz0 Z3MoR6ewUMCQzyxMRNqKBWA0CaXl9Kg5bSXAqpF+qymVNeHuxCynyHLZSGt894vCOaLr +nbvUvDOHlICO8iEvKfzFa1VvrPrsrZqQ0xu57qzCej4TXrmKtgTNK3CBdehnz1Yad8m E2a8JTpizIf0gfK0AN6ntAXuth03Dmk/Sf4kMcRv+a0/P8rSz9yZtMDakDfI4581CONP nhGtVUEFqqNBkjmkWNglbF1fByuEFKdfNeFvebemixKUMSu/QX6rexv18UlUL/bEbF7Y TdLg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=LzBv6m1vPIL7/RF8uYFkuOR2dwzIsUMdUh6iBcqPluI=; b=pyELWw2xpAu5pZ9kWE2WS/yPZaApcNGHIZn+mjzUXu1h3A6me2pQFV+27e8Z4Wf8X7 /sNlgDNxCVClnjrGxOV4A9Ayk6rnXM044fGobzAEyeekVQkVrVLNu6dAGrzRHpyfM4Vc 5DlDeT6LZjISmsKtFnyNWkbta1d0vSmG/J/XccCv4nV4hgA4etbm9rlXTbaDPOh8YVPD e80BjAYEDB+YsXelDPIgNLD6X5HHQ1F+pfT9DO4a0q3Gn5x1fyIzPh60X+vy2W8gjSxI CPwxFDHtk5Ap86/EpQ2Urpf+XL10+xSN6FPVmfADdeIEPPwyxzLh6LgJLxwDzenS0F5o KUfw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532as0NP/b9AuKftHFggvqlR733Q7K1xUSC4vY5Vg/nLd79llRwk t/TLExsgbWtNVi4KxDXsF7JrOAgQkkRw9QHntjw4wvqq X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxNNC7peE5ca7c1t+3nBX3Ern1zKf1FTCJMjcvEzV0VZjC4bLYL77PxoVyFBD/A3Atnn6Dr8avv3W9r9It0Tjo= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8593:: with SMTP id b19mr6927289lji.290.1600192939198; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 11:02:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200902200815.3924-1-maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com> <20200902200815.3924-8-maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com> <20200903195114.ccfzmgcl4ngz2mqv@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <20200911185927.GA2543@ranger.igk.intel.com> <20200915043924.uicfgbhuszccycbq@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <20200915174551.GA3728@ranger.igk.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20200915174551.GA3728@ranger.igk.intel.com> From: Alexei Starovoitov Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 11:02:07 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 bpf-next 7/7] selftests: bpf: add dummy prog for bpf2bpf with tailcall To: Maciej Fijalkowski Cc: Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , bpf , Network Development , =?UTF-8?B?QmrDtnJuIFTDtnBlbA==?= , "Karlsson, Magnus" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: bpf-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 10:52 AM Maciej Fijalkowski wrote: > > > + /* this means we are at the end of the call chain; if throughout this > > > > In my mind 'end of the call chain' means 'leaf function', > > so the comment reads a bit misleading to me. > > Here we're at the end of subprog. > > It's not necessarily the leaf function. > > Hmm you're right i'll try to rephrase that. > > What about just: > "if tail call got detected across bpf2bpf calls then mark each of the > currently present subprog frames as tail call reachable subprogs" sounds good to me.