From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19528C433EF for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2022 18:24:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1356175AbiALSYW (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jan 2022 13:24:22 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45694 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1356166AbiALSYR (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jan 2022 13:24:17 -0500 Received: from mail-io1-xd2e.google.com (mail-io1-xd2e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F93CC061748; Wed, 12 Jan 2022 10:24:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-io1-xd2e.google.com with SMTP id v1so4865711ioj.10; Wed, 12 Jan 2022 10:24:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=xFSrcJFcLbWaS9g4H0h+8wluxp6gHrT+Bua0ZmBYWB4=; b=JsoeVbxRRL7KvvWrpKt0xE6a8sjb9BJ1HefDkriX/BmSB/UDj7NQNsMxZf1ePDBUm7 M6HZPmY3TFrXtOTnarffUqk1aIDtb5fWtoNxMU+TTM+d83hGoVGl07Cf++g4OlFrZq+4 Z0x4ctbQYXjP2F3yCTW2lIGj881zStumUUdwfcvHJ1IWilkUiu//L0k11HDHh5Lkg24m DIpRpJc4KqCzmmn1+HLJYbCwOqFj9BLCB/5mv7p2dufyFm5A+Of4hNSafia5zjwbcF4/ LilFIIZ0bSSzRSPu04ZY3Y+whtX6OylASIAMpkM+DrJg8nvvRitI/R/bT3j66fXokE8H vDnQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xFSrcJFcLbWaS9g4H0h+8wluxp6gHrT+Bua0ZmBYWB4=; b=r0Po4roEksFnhmQnJ8vS4L1ky9tWw2+PhoeY2Cnkieg1oE3sAJi0suxD9zu8gZhP0s qJT/8FBkdCdSSz9RJipGMW5wzq9tr4LMI1EQIdKxlxWUcmXJ8PSch31FcRrcZF4WAnAA mtex3Ar+o4JJUj0dEIz2oQtS0DOE7Lx8knxrFBwBqI3AUlxcA2iwYbXG2Gq6fTtjuQ8A rQQ7lgBiCbkNhYM82AOqzduNytPhHLKRDsW5KtuaxgZzuDaObhSQrs5w39Dn96emV8Ig s0oHxT13otLs1E9sd1pbtzoBxzGVOemCWB29ol7ZY4w9yWufvr42LpjvApl0630o664X oUYA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Vvz4CgrICFmzYXrai0e8rA6S9GlprW/e5XfPv1wfxGbyEZ5Sl lw8zdT+bSnFSL90ps7EmjLMt7x4M2yMvq8o3wbSSYzC9 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw1DB97XndZyC84WGpQVMtI+qMw+HdDizPsD/vZMVScBMeX7yvWc/LjNZQU2a9bXUrQwCdTyhD8yAJ4hEqobzw= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:410a:: with SMTP id ay10mr496664jab.237.1642011856466; Wed, 12 Jan 2022 10:24:16 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Andrii Nakryiko Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2022 10:24:05 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v21 bpf-next 18/23] libbpf: Add SEC name for xdp_mb programs To: Lorenzo Bianconi Cc: bpf , Networking , Lorenzo Bianconi , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Shay Agroskin , john fastabend , David Ahern , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , Eelco Chaudron , Jason Wang , Alexander Duyck , Saeed Mahameed , Maciej Fijalkowski , Magnus Karlsson , tirthendu.sarkar@intel.com, =?UTF-8?B?VG9rZSBIw7hpbGFuZC1Kw7hyZ2Vuc2Vu?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 10:18 AM Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 9, 2022 at 7:05 AM Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > > > > > Introduce support for the following SEC entries for XDP multi-buff > > > property: > > > - SEC("xdp_mb/") > > > - SEC("xdp_devmap_mb/") > > > - SEC("xdp_cpumap_mb/") > > > > Libbpf seemed to went with . rule (e.g., fentry.s for > > sleepable, seems like we'll have kprobe.multi or something along > > those lines as well), so let's stay consistent and call this "xdp_mb", > > "xdp_devmap.mb", "xdp_cpumap.mb" (btw, is "mb" really all that > > recognizable? would ".multibuf" be too verbose?). Also, why the "/" > > part? Also it shouldn't be "sloppy" either. Neither expected attach > > type should be optional. Also not sure SEC_ATTACHABLE is needed. So > > at most it should be SEC_XDP_MB, probably. > > ack, I fine with it. Something like: > > SEC_DEF("lsm.s/", LSM, BPF_LSM_MAC, SEC_ATTACH_BTF | SEC_SLEEPABLE, attach_lsm), > SEC_DEF("iter/", TRACING, BPF_TRACE_ITER, SEC_ATTACH_BTF, attach_iter), > SEC_DEF("syscall", SYSCALL, 0, SEC_SLEEPABLE), > + SEC_DEF("xdp_devmap.multibuf", XDP, BPF_XDP_DEVMAP, 0), > SEC_DEF("xdp_devmap/", XDP, BPF_XDP_DEVMAP, SEC_ATTACHABLE), > + SEC_DEF("xdp_cpumap.multibuf", XDP, BPF_XDP_CPUMAP, 0), > SEC_DEF("xdp_cpumap/", XDP, BPF_XDP_CPUMAP, SEC_ATTACHABLE), > + SEC_DEF("xdp.multibuf", XDP, BPF_XDP, 0), yep, but please use SEC_NONE instead of zero > SEC_DEF("xdp", XDP, BPF_XDP, SEC_ATTACHABLE_OPT | SEC_SLOPPY_PFX), > SEC_DEF("perf_event", PERF_EVENT, 0, SEC_NONE | SEC_SLOPPY_PFX), > SEC_DEF("lwt_in", LWT_IN, 0, SEC_NONE | SEC_SLOPPY_PFX), > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Toke Hoiland-Jorgensen > > > Acked-by: John Fastabend > > > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Bianconi > > > --- > > > tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 8 ++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c > > > index 7f10dd501a52..c93f6afef96c 100644 > > > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c > > > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c > > > @@ -235,6 +235,8 @@ enum sec_def_flags { > > > SEC_SLEEPABLE = 8, > > > /* allow non-strict prefix matching */ > > > SEC_SLOPPY_PFX = 16, > > > + /* BPF program support XDP multi-buff */ > > > + SEC_XDP_MB = 32, > > > }; > > > > > > struct bpf_sec_def { > > > @@ -6562,6 +6564,9 @@ static int libbpf_preload_prog(struct bpf_program *prog, > > > if (def & SEC_SLEEPABLE) > > > opts->prog_flags |= BPF_F_SLEEPABLE; > > > > > > + if (prog->type == BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP && (def & SEC_XDP_MB)) > > > + opts->prog_flags |= BPF_F_XDP_MB; > > > > I'd say you don't even need SEC_XDP_MB flag at all, you can just check > > that prog->sec_name is one of "xdp.mb", "xdp_devmap.mb" or > > "xdp_cpumap.mb" and add the flag. SEC_XDP_MB doesn't seem generic > > enough to warrant a flag. > > ack, something like: > > + if (prog->type == BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP && > + (!strcmp(prog->sec_name, "xdp_devmap.multibuf") || > + !strcmp(prog->sec_name, "xdp_cpumap.multibuf") || > + !strcmp(prog->sec_name, "xdp.multibuf"))) > + opts->prog_flags |= BPF_F_XDP_MB; yep, can also simplify it a bit with strstr(prog->sec_name, ".multibuf") instead of three strcmp > > Regards, > Lorenzo > > > > > > + > > > if ((prog->type == BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING || > > > prog->type == BPF_PROG_TYPE_LSM || > > > prog->type == BPF_PROG_TYPE_EXT) && !prog->attach_btf_id) { > > > @@ -8600,8 +8605,11 @@ static const struct bpf_sec_def section_defs[] = { > > > SEC_DEF("lsm.s/", LSM, BPF_LSM_MAC, SEC_ATTACH_BTF | SEC_SLEEPABLE, attach_lsm), > > > SEC_DEF("iter/", TRACING, BPF_TRACE_ITER, SEC_ATTACH_BTF, attach_iter), > > > SEC_DEF("syscall", SYSCALL, 0, SEC_SLEEPABLE), > > > + SEC_DEF("xdp_devmap_mb/", XDP, BPF_XDP_DEVMAP, SEC_ATTACHABLE | SEC_XDP_MB), > > > SEC_DEF("xdp_devmap/", XDP, BPF_XDP_DEVMAP, SEC_ATTACHABLE), > > > + SEC_DEF("xdp_cpumap_mb/", XDP, BPF_XDP_CPUMAP, SEC_ATTACHABLE | SEC_XDP_MB), > > > SEC_DEF("xdp_cpumap/", XDP, BPF_XDP_CPUMAP, SEC_ATTACHABLE), > > > + SEC_DEF("xdp_mb/", XDP, BPF_XDP, SEC_ATTACHABLE_OPT | SEC_SLOPPY_PFX | SEC_XDP_MB), > > > SEC_DEF("xdp", XDP, BPF_XDP, SEC_ATTACHABLE_OPT | SEC_SLOPPY_PFX), > > > SEC_DEF("perf_event", PERF_EVENT, 0, SEC_NONE | SEC_SLOPPY_PFX), > > > SEC_DEF("lwt_in", LWT_IN, 0, SEC_NONE | SEC_SLOPPY_PFX), > > > -- > > > 2.33.1 > > >