diff options
| author | Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com> | 2022-11-15 00:45:22 +0530 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> | 2022-11-14 21:52:45 -0800 |
| commit | 1f6d52f1a8947436dc5b2575e2fffb831f240141 (patch) | |
| tree | fc904166e145fd51837cc51c9e8250ef9b8c2d79 /Documentation/bpf | |
| parent | de763fbb2c5bfad1ab7c4232e6a804726f0b0744 (diff) | |
| download | linux-1f6d52f1a8947436dc5b2575e2fffb831f240141.tar.gz | |
bpf: Remove local kptr references in documentation
We don't want to commit to a specific name for these. Simply call them
allocated objects coming from bpf_obj_new, which is completely clear in
itself.
Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221114191547.1694267-2-memxor@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/bpf')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst | 11 |
1 files changed, 6 insertions, 5 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst b/Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst index 17e774d96c5e4b..cec2371173d7e4 100644 --- a/Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst +++ b/Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst @@ -332,13 +332,14 @@ avoid defining types with 'bpf\_' prefix to not be broken in future releases. In other words, no backwards compatibility is guaranteed if one using a type in BTF with 'bpf\_' prefix. -Q: What is the compatibility story for special BPF types in local kptrs? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -Q: Same as above, but for local kptrs (i.e. pointers to objects allocated using -bpf_obj_new for user defined structures). Will the kernel preserve backwards +Q: What is the compatibility story for special BPF types in allocated objects? +------------------------------------------------------------------------------ +Q: Same as above, but for allocated objects (i.e. objects allocated using +bpf_obj_new for user defined types). Will the kernel preserve backwards compatibility for these features? A: NO. Unlike map value types, there are no stability guarantees for this case. The -whole local kptr API itself is unstable (since it is exposed through kfuncs). +whole API to work with allocated objects and any support for special fields +inside them is unstable (since it is exposed through kfuncs). |