netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] Introduce libbpf_attach_type_by

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 26 Sep 2018 16:20:07 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To:     Andrey Ignatov <rdna@...com>
Cc:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <ast@...nel.org>, <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] Introduce libbpf_attach_type_by_name

On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 15:24:52 -0700, Andrey Ignatov wrote:
> This patch set introduces libbpf_attach_type_by_name function in libbpf to
> identify attach type by section name.
> 
> This is useful to avoid writing same logic over and over again in user
> space applications that leverage libbpf.
> 
> Patch 1 has more details on the new function and problem being solved.
> Patches 2 and 3 add support for new section names.
> Patch 4 uses new function in a selftest.
> Patch 5 adds selftest for libbpf_{prog,attach}_type_by_name.
> 
> As a side note there are a lot of inconsistencies now between names used by
> libbpf and bpftool (e.g. cgroup/skb vs cgroup_skb, cgroup_device and device
> vs cgroup/dev, sockops vs sock_ops, etc). This patch set does not address
> it but it tries not to make it harder to address it in the future.

I was wondering a few times whether I should point it out to people
during review, but thought it would be nit picking.  Maybe we should be
more strict.

Your series LGTM!