From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
To: "John Fastabend" <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
"Björn Töpel" <bjorn.topel@intel.com>,
"Maciej Fijalkowski" <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>,
daniel@iogearbox.net, ast@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: andrii@kernel.org, magnus.karlsson@intel.com, ciara.loftus@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] libbpf: xsk: use bpf_link
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2021 22:38:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8735xxc8pf.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <602ad80c566ea_3ed4120871@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch>
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> writes:
>> > However, in libxdp we can solve the original problem in a different way,
>> > and in fact I already suggested to Magnus that we should do this (see
>> > [1]); so one way forward could be to address it during the merge in
>> > libxdp? It should be possible to address the original issue (two
>> > instances of xdpsock breaking each other when they exit), but
>> > applications will still need to do an explicit unload operation before
>> > exiting (i.e., the automatic detach on bpf_link fd closure will take
>> > more work, and likely require extending the bpf_link kernel support)...
>> >
>>
>> I'd say it's depending on the libbpf 1.0/libxdp merge timeframe. If
>> we're months ahead, then I'd really like to see this in libbpf until the
>> merge. However, I'll leave that for Magnus/you to decide!
>
> Did I miss some thread? What does this mean libbpf 1.0/libxdp merge?
The idea is to keep libbpf focused on bpf, and move the AF_XDP stuff to
libxdp (so the socket stuff in xsk.h). We're adding the existing code
wholesale, and keeping API compatibility during the move, so all that's
needed is adding -lxdp when compiling. And obviously the existing libbpf
code isn't going anywhere until such a time as there's a general
backwards compatibility-breaking deprecation in libbpf (which I believe
Andrii is planning to do in an upcoming and as-of-yet unannounced v1.0
release).
While integrating the XSK code into libxdp we're trying to make it
compatible with the rest of the library (i.e., multi-prog). Hence my
preference to avoid introducing something that makes this harder :)
-Toke
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-15 21:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-15 15:46 [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] Introduce bpf_link in libbpf's xsk Maciej Fijalkowski
2021-02-15 15:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] libbpf: xsk: use bpf_link Maciej Fijalkowski
2021-02-15 17:07 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-02-15 17:38 ` Björn Töpel
2021-02-15 19:35 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-02-16 2:01 ` Maciej Fijalkowski
2021-02-16 9:15 ` Björn Töpel
2021-02-16 10:27 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-02-16 20:15 ` Maciej Fijalkowski
2021-02-15 20:22 ` John Fastabend
2021-02-15 21:38 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen [this message]
2021-02-16 0:18 ` John Fastabend
2021-02-16 2:23 ` Maciej Fijalkowski
2021-02-16 9:23 ` Björn Töpel
2021-02-16 10:36 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-02-23 1:15 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-02-17 2:23 ` Dan Siemon
2021-02-17 7:16 ` Magnus Karlsson
2021-02-17 7:36 ` Magnus Karlsson
2021-02-16 2:10 ` Maciej Fijalkowski
2021-02-15 20:49 ` John Fastabend
2021-02-16 2:38 ` Maciej Fijalkowski
2021-02-16 18:19 ` John Fastabend
2021-02-16 20:10 ` Maciej Fijalkowski
2021-02-16 9:20 ` Björn Töpel
2021-02-16 10:39 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-02-16 19:15 ` John Fastabend
2021-02-16 20:50 ` Maciej Fijalkowski
2021-02-16 21:17 ` John Fastabend
2021-02-15 15:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] libbpf: clear map_info before each bpf_obj_get_info_by_fd Maciej Fijalkowski
2021-02-15 20:33 ` John Fastabend
2021-02-16 2:42 ` Maciej Fijalkowski
2021-02-15 15:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] samples: bpf: do not unload prog within xdpsock Maciej Fijalkowski
2021-02-15 20:24 ` John Fastabend
2021-02-16 9:22 ` Björn Töpel
2021-02-16 14:15 ` Maciej Fijalkowski
2021-02-15 16:07 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] Introduce bpf_link in libbpf's xsk Björn Töpel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8735xxc8pf.fsf@toke.dk \
--to=toke@redhat.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bjorn.topel@intel.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ciara.loftus@intel.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com \
--cc=magnus.karlsson@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).