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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,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 EC872C432BE for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 13:30:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7BF160184 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 13:30:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238034AbhG2Nak (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jul 2021 09:30:40 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46608 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237957AbhG2NaJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jul 2021 09:30:09 -0400 Received: from mail-yb1-xb33.google.com (mail-yb1-xb33.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b33]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B8B1C06179F for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 06:30:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb1-xb33.google.com with SMTP id s48so10220517ybi.7 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 06:30:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=anyfinetworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0Qz9La3QPRMndTjsVYo9vnU/gF+lgGUUdSa/ncd8lBk=; b=yuwYCym4ZCkUrjAr3kGI7Zwpk9UdTA6kptMprZ7yZVZeVD1JU4YjO07xP0jNSuSS81 wDOmj4pxIN6tYlRAzi/FaabfoDFunVVKscYb5n8c0EFEZZcLmq9zQQ9M8rlkzafAi82M 1iRebWSFOqQtH2dMYfOHWZ7z5gZbFvefCxV9txdXz4rslX1hnxB/MIenBOyBYOgZLCvu aTktHQjUL7j9PJ90feDGnY0TDjniT8Tfy2akKN1Lzea3Od1zUQp1nCnWLlL/+JOmZ0Zh OPJCPoArD8Zmr1tSNMRrEM5CjnMJqNHsY0FjozL6aoUa6vKkVWkMT1vT9WiOWTt3loKp u/Bw== 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=0Qz9La3QPRMndTjsVYo9vnU/gF+lgGUUdSa/ncd8lBk=; b=hX37n7ROdu0KBHdpyEuMdgbshZB/xNQH31FxdAx5H0oIbcPBxrWs8M1of2C55wwxTq 0DGbSR6efVRHyjjhC7S+OWw9/D+jA3ptUP8rdeMbxWwEFfkrfRFgt0fFLz/w2cWHBkKi PnXG6AzXjmtGgwkObP7NuHycIpeeL/AmYrlyVpQzD8f7adU1ZBBnvJk0oxuAiLRxLeQM LEHIhenbrbkzUe5hxdE/DoMuLyvw9SpHsjDF9gVusKbCNjj0IaepUI26Kf/nqnFS4ubG c9GMFdIQymaEgmYJnx0QV1D5gNYQhOgucm6qcGltA1BZIJT8sOEh0cXZm3JnAiEy7o3y UF6Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532wu8fKeP3O09PIh/CP/bd/4y7WnbzBczPXQIiSdoySlrNTKXIb yMa+Xa4r8TI2NeJIMQ8LwDpPnelwRdnyF2KYnlLdAA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxDNB+xboKdpjjX2tqT4JaA88pbPliST3MyNExL63yz6P083Fk3EPy5DbC/pEXFSKrJgyvieiwFRMc5o98+tjs= X-Received: by 2002:a25:380c:: with SMTP id f12mr7088014yba.208.1627565403514; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 06:30:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210728170502.351010-1-johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com> <20210728170502.351010-12-johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com> In-Reply-To: From: Johan Almbladh Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2021 15:29:52 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/14] bpf/tests: Add test for 32-bit context pointer argument passing To: Yonghong Song Cc: Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , John Fastabend , KP Singh , Tony Ambardar , Networking , bpf Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 2:09 AM Yonghong Song wrote: > On 7/28/21 10:04 AM, Johan Almbladh wrote: > > On a 32-bit architecture, the context pointer should occupy the low > > half of R0, and the other half should be zero. > > I think this is probably true. The word choice "should" indicates > this doesn't need to be the case if people choose a different > implementation, right? > Right. To the best of my knowledge this is true. I can change the wording to "will" to remove the ambiguity.