Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 8 Aug 2013 01:27:32 -0700
From:      Guy Harris <guy@alum.mit.edu>
To:        darrenr@netbsd.org
Cc:        tech-net@netbsd.org, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius <rmind@netbsd.org>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: BPF_MISC+BPF_COP and BPF_COPX
Message-ID:  <0C9DFD21-D09F-4163-BF90-4258838577A7@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <5203535D.2040508@netbsd.org>
References:  <20130804191310.2FFBB14A152@mail.netbsd.org> <5202693C.50608@netbsd.org> <20130807175548.1528014A21F@mail.netbsd.org> <5203535D.2040508@netbsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Aug 8, 2013, at 1:14 AM, Darren Reed <darrenr@netbsd.org> wrote:

> A BPF program generated on Linux is just as valid as on Solaris or =
NetBSD.

Not necessarily - negative offsets in load and store instructions are =
supported on Linux to access some metadata that's not in the packet =
data, but those aren't, as far as I know, supported on other platforms.

However, there is a subset of BPF that all kernel BPF implementations, =
and the userland implementation in libpcap, support.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0C9DFD21-D09F-4163-BF90-4258838577A7>