[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d86035d9-66f0-de37-42ef-8eaa4d849651@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 10:58:03 +0100
From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
Cc: io-uring@...r.kernel.org, Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
Horst Schirmeier <horst.schirmeier@...dortmund.de>,
"Franz-B . Tuneke" <franz-bernhard.tuneke@...dortmund.de>,
Christian Dietrich <stettberger@...ucode.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/23] libbpf: support io_uring
On 5/19/21 6:38 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 7:14 AM Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
>> ---
>> tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 7 +++++++
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
>> index 4181d178ee7b..de5d1508f58e 100644
>> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
>> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
>> @@ -13,6 +13,10 @@
>> #ifndef _GNU_SOURCE
>> #define _GNU_SOURCE
>> #endif
>> +
>> +/* hack, use local headers instead of system-wide */
>> +#include "../../../include/uapi/linux/bpf.h"
>> +
>
> libbpf is already using the latest UAPI headers, so you don't need
> this hack. You just haven't synced include/uapi/linux/bpf.h into
> tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
It's more convenient to keep it local to me while RFC, surely will
drop it later.
btw, I had a problem with find_sec_def() successfully matching
"iouring.s" string with "iouring", because section_defs[i].len
doesn't include final \0 and so does a sort of prefix comparison.
That's why "iouring/". Can we fix it? Are compatibility concerns?
>
>> #include <stdlib.h>
>> #include <stdio.h>
>> #include <stdarg.h>
>> @@ -8630,6 +8634,9 @@ static const struct bpf_sec_def section_defs[] = {
>> BPF_PROG_SEC("struct_ops", BPF_PROG_TYPE_STRUCT_OPS),
>> BPF_EAPROG_SEC("sk_lookup/", BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_LOOKUP,
>> BPF_SK_LOOKUP),
>> + SEC_DEF("iouring/", IOURING),
>> + SEC_DEF("iouring.s/", IOURING,
>> + .is_sleepable = true),
>> };
>>
>> #undef BPF_PROG_SEC_IMPL
>> --
>> 2.31.1
>>
--
Pavel Begunkov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists