netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 16/21] tools/libbpf: add bpf

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 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:   Sat, 9 May 2020 17:35:35 -0700
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
Cc:     Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 16/21] tools/libbpf: add bpf_iter support

On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 10:59:17AM -0700, Yonghong Song wrote:
> @@ -6891,6 +6897,7 @@ static int bpf_object__collect_st_ops_relos(struct bpf_object *obj,
>  
>  #define BTF_TRACE_PREFIX "btf_trace_"
>  #define BTF_LSM_PREFIX "bpf_lsm_"
> +#define BTF_ITER_PREFIX "__bpf_iter__"
>  #define BTF_MAX_NAME_SIZE 128

In the kernel source the prefix doesn't stand out, but on libbpf side it looks
inconsistent. May be drop __ prefix and keep one _ in the suffix?