[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <664003d3-aadb-4938-80f6-67fab1c9dcdd@daynix.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 14:36:32 +0900
From: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com>
To: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
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 2023/11/22 14:25, Song Liu wrote:
> 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.
Is it possible to ensure that a QEMU binary with the eBPF program
included works on different kernel versions without UAPI-level stability
then? Otherwise, I think we need to think of the minimal UAPI addition
that exposes the feature I propose, and the two options I presented
first are the candidates of such: the stable BPF change or tuntap
interface change.
Regards,
Akihiko Odaki
Powered by blists - more mailing lists