netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: Add '_wait()' and '_nowait()' macros for 'bpf_ring_buffer_

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]

Message-ID: <BCF68ADA-5114-4E61-87DE-D5E5C946BC6F@fb.com>
Date:   Mon, 29 Mar 2021 16:28:18 +0000
From:   Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
To:     Pedro Tammela <pctammela@...il.com>
CC:     Pedro Tammela <pctammela@...atatu.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Martin Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Joe Stringer <joe@...ium.io>,
        Quentin Monnet <quentin@...valent.com>,
        Yang Li <yang.lee@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: Add '_wait()' and '_nowait()' macros for
 'bpf_ring_buffer__poll()'



> On Mar 28, 2021, at 9:10 AM, Pedro Tammela <pctammela@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> 'bpf_ring_buffer__poll()' abstracts the polling method, so abstract the
> constants that make the implementation don't wait or wait indefinetly
> for data.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pedro Tammela <pctammela@...atatu.com>
> ---
> tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h                                 | 3 +++
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbufs.c    | 2 +-
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ringbuf.c       | 6 +++---
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ringbuf_multi.c | 4 ++--
> 4 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
> index f500621d28e5..3817d84f91c6 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
> @@ -540,6 +540,9 @@ LIBBPF_API int ring_buffer__poll(struct ring_buffer *rb, int timeout_ms);
> LIBBPF_API int ring_buffer__consume(struct ring_buffer *rb);
> LIBBPF_API int ring_buffer__epoll_fd(const struct ring_buffer *rb);
> 
> +#define ring_buffer__poll_wait(rb) ring_buffer__poll(rb, -1)
> +#define ring_buffer__poll_nowait(rb) ring_buffer__poll(rb, 0)

I think we don't need ring_buffer__poll_wait() as ring_buffer__poll() already 
means "wait for timeout_ms". 

Actually, I think ring_buffer__poll() is enough. ring_buffer__poll_nowait() 
is not that useful either. 

Thanks,
Song