[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPhsuW4o5o41a+jVjgGP+Ck3eUD8w6coLXMTYewXKJYmciLLnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 21:25:37 -0800
From: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
To: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Mykola Lysenko <mykolal@...com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
Yuri Benditovich <yuri.benditovich@...nix.com>,
Andrew Melnychenko <andrew@...nix.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] bpf: Introduce BPF_PROG_TYPE_VNET_HASH
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 12:05 AM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com> wrote:
>
> On 2023/11/20 6:02, Song Liu wrote:
[...]
> >> In contrast, our intended use case is more like a normal application.
> >> So, for example, a user may download a container and run QEMU (including
> >> the BPF program) installed in the container. As such, it is nice if the
> >> ABI is stable across kernel releases, but it is not guaranteed for
> >> kfuncs. Such a use case is already covered with the eBPF steering
> >> program so I want to maintain it if possible.
> >
> > TBH, I don't think stability should be a concern for kfuncs used by QEMU.
> > Many core BPF APIs are now implemented as kfuncs: bpf_dynptr_*,
> > bpf_rcu_*, etc. As long as there are valid use cases,these kfuncs will
> > be supported.
>
> Documentation/bpf/kfuncs.rst still says:
> > kfuncs provide a kernel <-> kernel API, and thus are not bound by any
> > of the strict stability restrictions associated with kernel <-> user
> > UAPIs.
>
> Is it possible to change the statement like as follows:
> "Most kfuncs provide a kernel <-> kernel API, and thus are not bound by
> any of the strict stability restrictions associated with kernel <-> user
> UAPIs. kfuncs that have same stability restrictions associated with
> UAPIs are exceptional, and must be carefully reviewed by subsystem (and
> BPF?) maintainers as any other UAPIs are."
I am afraid this is against the intention to not guarantee UAPI-level stability
for kfuncs.
Thanks,
Song
Powered by blists - more mailing lists