[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190131211941.2bfba5f2@carbon>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 21:19:41 +0100
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Cc: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciejromanfijalkowski@...il.com>,
daniel@...earbox.net, ast@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
brouer@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 5/7] samples/bpf: Add a "force" flag to XDP
samples
On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 18:26:53 -0800
Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 20:08:59 +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > > I'll post a v5 with libbpf_strerror() usage when bpf_set_link_xdp_fd failed in
> > > samples but at this point it will only give us a standard "device or resource
> > > busy" error
> >
> > That is a good first iteration improvement. And if QA complains, I can
> > quickly diagnose and explain the issue, based on this generic message,
> > without digging further and wasting more time.
> >
> > > , so if we need some more meaningful message that libbpf will give
> > > us then I guess we need to define a new libbpf_errno entry (as well as entry in
> > > libbpf_strerror_table for this new errno value) and set the errno in
> > > bpf_set_link_xdp_fd in case of a failure?
> >
> > It likely require more work do provide more meaningful messages, and I
> > guess it is out-of-scope for your patchset.
>
> Perhaps we could put the error message in extack instead?
That is actually a good idea, for providing these more meaningful
messages.
--Jesper
Powered by blists - more mailing lists