5 ms·
One similarity seems to be the way they both restrict user access to the stack to prevent stack corruption or overflow. The article talks about how eBPF doesn'
by haberman 7y ago
One similarity seems to be the way they both restrict user access to the stack to prevent stack corruption or overflow. The article talks about how eBPF doesn't have an explicit stack pointer and doesn't give a function access to caller or callee stack frames. I have read similar things about how WASM protects its stack, though I don't know much of the details.
- kbumsik 7y agoI mean, their runtime models might share similarities but eBPF is not meant to be a general purpose machine, it is kinda a kernel add-on for programmable tracing.
- cthalupa 7y ago>it is kinda a kernel add-on for programmable tracing. Well, that's the thing I personally mostly use it for via bpftrace and bcc, but that's not the only thing. It's being used for a lot of networking related things too. XDP, CloudFlare uses it for a lot of their DDoS mitigation, etc.