On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 02:08:07PM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > Now, I would like to avoid going down that road to pull
> > in kernel internal headers into test_verifier.c, could
> > we instead add a bpf_ptregs.h helper in tools/testing/selftests/bpf/,
> > where s390 and arm64 would put a defin
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Heiko Carstens
wrote:
>
> I really don't think that struct pt_regs is part of uapi and should be
> exported. We did change the layout of the pt_regs structure more than once
> and would like to be able to do so in the future as well.
On some architectures, pt_regs
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 05:28:38PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> From: Thomas-Mich Richter
> Date: Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:22 AM
> [...]
> >I work on the perf tool and its bpf support for IBM s390 and came across a
> >strange issue compiling tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c on s390x.
>
On 08/04/2017 05:28 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> From: Thomas-Mich Richter
> Date: Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:22 AM
> [...]
>> I work on the perf tool and its bpf support for IBM s390 and came across a
>> strange issue compiling tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c on s390x.
>>
>> This is the co
From: Thomas-Mich Richter
Date: Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:22 AM
[...]
I work on the perf tool and its bpf support for IBM s390 and came across a
strange issue compiling tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c on s390x.
This is the compile error:
gcc -Wall -O2 -I../../../include/uapi -I../../../
5 matches
Mail list logo