backends/ebpf: Fix #4098 by renaming conflicting write_partial macro. #4134
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
tatry
reviewed
Sep 8, 2023
thomascalvert-xlnx
force-pushed
the
issue-4098
branch
from
7ceec3c
to
32630ac
Compare
tatry
approved these changes
Sep 13, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As mentioned in the issue, we have conflicting versions of this macro. This patch avoids the issue by renaming the second version.
In an ideal world, all call sites would make use of the second, more general version. But that felt like too invasive a change, so instead I went for a minimalist approach.
The issue never arose before, because the only flow which made use of
ebpfDeparserwas within the PSA target.