Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the net tree

From: Daniel Borkmann <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 23:17:55 +0200

On 4/29/24 8:56 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 11:49:39 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>   +u64 __weak bpf_arch_uaddress_limit(void)
>>   +{
>>   +#if defined(CONFIG_64BIT) && defined(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NON_OVERLAPPING_ADDRESS_SPACE)
>>   +	return TASK_SIZE;
>>   +#else
>>   +	return 0;
>>   +#endif
>>   +}
>>   +
>> + bool __weak bpf_jit_supports_insn(struct bpf_insn *insn, bool in_arena)
>> + {
>> + 	return false;
>> + }
> 
> Thanks! FTR I plan to used the inverse order, if that matters..

Yeap, that looks cleaner, same for the signature in the header given the others
prefixed with bpf_jit_supports_*.

Thanks,
Daniel