Main fixes #119
Merged
Main fixes #119
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
grantseltzer
approved these changes
Jan 21, 2022
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This LGTM for now, #112 will have to cherry pick the reverted commits to rebase on top of and we can test on top of that. Unfortunate that we have to do this, but I agree that it's the right call.
This was referenced Jan 21, 2022
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
@grantseltzer @itaysk @yanivagman
My proposal here is that we do a step back for the error handling, so we can have libbpfgo main in a good shape.
There is on going discussion at PR: #112 about the error handling approach (in another PR) and my feeling is that we're not ready for that change yet (main return behavior for important functions is currently broken).
Would you mind going back to keep the branch stable and we're able to land other fixes (like the ones being proposed here) ?