On 14/11/2023 10:24, Zachary Leaf wrote:
I think it is added erroneously in this patch, but shouldn't it be added in patch 6 aka where we're adding bpfptr_put_uattr, since that is using in_compat64_syscall() for the first time?
Similarly also in patch 6 add to bpf.h where we add bpf_put_uattr + bpf_field_exists, also using in_compat64_syscall().
Ok - we end up including compat.h from elsewhere so it compiles fine, but we can't always rely on that. Seems sensible to add there, so I've added includes in patch 6 instead.
I think that's sensible yes.
Kevin