[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9b0aab2c-9b92-0bcb-2064-f66dd39e7552@iogearbox.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 00:59:28 +0200
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 2/3] libbpf: add low level TC-BPF API
On 4/20/21 9:37 PM, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
[...]
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
> index bec4e6a6e31d..b4ed6a41ea70 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
> @@ -16,6 +16,8 @@
> #include <stdbool.h>
> #include <sys/types.h> // for size_t
> #include <linux/bpf.h>
> +#include <linux/pkt_sched.h>
> +#include <linux/tc_act/tc_bpf.h>
>
> #include "libbpf_common.h"
>
> @@ -775,6 +777,48 @@ LIBBPF_API int bpf_linker__add_file(struct bpf_linker *linker, const char *filen
> LIBBPF_API int bpf_linker__finalize(struct bpf_linker *linker);
> LIBBPF_API void bpf_linker__free(struct bpf_linker *linker);
>
> +/* Convenience macros for the clsact attach hooks */
> +#define BPF_TC_CLSACT_INGRESS TC_H_MAKE(TC_H_CLSACT, TC_H_MIN_INGRESS)
> +#define BPF_TC_CLSACT_EGRESS TC_H_MAKE(TC_H_CLSACT, TC_H_MIN_EGRESS)
I would abstract those away into an enum, plus avoid having to pull in
linux/pkt_sched.h and linux/tc_act/tc_bpf.h from main libbpf.h header.
Just add a enum { BPF_TC_DIR_INGRESS, BPF_TC_DIR_EGRESS, } and then the
concrete tc bits (TC_H_MAKE()) can be translated internally.
> +struct bpf_tc_opts {
> + size_t sz;
Is this set anywhere?
> + __u32 handle;
> + __u32 class_id;
I'd remove class_id from here as well given in direct-action a BPF prog can
set it if needed.
> + __u16 priority;
> + bool replace;
> + size_t :0;
What's the rationale for this padding?
> +};
> +
> +#define bpf_tc_opts__last_field replace
> +
> +/* Acts as a handle for an attached filter */
> +struct bpf_tc_attach_id {
nit: maybe bpf_tc_ctx
> + __u32 handle;
> + __u16 priority;
> +};
> +
> +struct bpf_tc_info {
> + struct bpf_tc_attach_id id;
> + __u16 protocol;
> + __u32 chain_index;
> + __u32 prog_id;
> + __u8 tag[BPF_TAG_SIZE];
> + __u32 class_id;
> + __u32 bpf_flags;
> + __u32 bpf_flags_gen;
Given we do not yet have any setters e.g. for offload, etc, the one thing
I'd see useful and crucial initially is prog_id.
The protocol, chain_index, and I would also include tag should be dropped.
Similarly class_id given my earlier statement, and flags I would extend once
this lib API would support offloading progs.
> +};
> +
> +/* id is out parameter that will be written to, it must not be NULL */
> +LIBBPF_API int bpf_tc_attach(int fd, __u32 ifindex, __u32 parent_id,
> + const struct bpf_tc_opts *opts,
> + struct bpf_tc_attach_id *id);
> +LIBBPF_API int bpf_tc_detach(__u32 ifindex, __u32 parent_id,
> + const struct bpf_tc_attach_id *id);
> +LIBBPF_API int bpf_tc_get_info(__u32 ifindex, __u32 parent_id,
> + const struct bpf_tc_attach_id *id,
> + struct bpf_tc_info *info);
As per above, for parent_id I'd replace with dir enum.
> +
> #ifdef __cplusplus
> } /* extern "C" */
> #endif
Powered by blists - more mailing lists