From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 45711 invoked by alias); 19 Jun 2018 20:06:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 45702 invoked by uid 89); 19 Jun 2018 20:06:36 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_SHORT,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] elf.h: Add BPF relocation types. To: Mark Wielaard , libc-alpha@sourceware.org Cc: Yonghong Song , Richard Henderson References: <20180616214515.10737-1-mark@klomp.org> From: Florian Weimer Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 20:06:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180616214515.10737-1-mark@klomp.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2018-06/txt/msg00570.txt.bz2 On 06/16/2018 11:45 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote: > The BPF ELF format has new relocation types R_BPF_64_64 and R_BPF_64_32. > The existing R_BPF_MAP_FD was an extension that never got implemented. > Remove it, because its constant conflicts with the official R_BPF_64_64. Is there an ABI manual against which we could review this change? The last change said that this was added to the Generic ABI , but there is no evidence of that. Thanks, Florian