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 63857C4332F for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 19:07:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229732AbiLHTHO (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Dec 2022 14:07:14 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37694 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229651AbiLHTHN (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Dec 2022 14:07:13 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-x1033.google.com (mail-pj1-x1033.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1033]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59BFB8F098 for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 11:07:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pj1-x1033.google.com with SMTP id gt4so814372pjb.1 for ; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 11:07:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=XCQxkSX68wqC+xYZ6HcQAhvyVD70BBTOb/sZXInwVAc=; b=l+5tyS5BrFG6cf5CmXiStrreFA3TGHQ36+ParPAf3rG87vze/JHPDMtR7EeTQeNR94 yguiOl7brDY/rJc5yv5m2NledHuTzRUTXwpT+ORLysWopKGEwDQovasRrU7iGqzYBBpY YKOtN+ifQPRa4bj4DjVNCA+WlZkxACeBckdHvlmdgmxTRSrVNbUe+G/FvopjcvWL8Llh iPm3428sT5eSj5S1GLBTuq1azMha4EP3hQKvitB4+dRpHw8dXSA/zoMWf+6yZycKQ2Qn ATEwbWyIlXNWS1+w4Y2MRJh/DniR1bUjRLvuzKXCtmuMxWY6qcWlrpo1YEmdt1lTm3T5 5J2w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=XCQxkSX68wqC+xYZ6HcQAhvyVD70BBTOb/sZXInwVAc=; b=EaMf0TqUZhIimkeMZaBNDpKNHej5SQJSv16aAP4itDgiIQ46uLq344RsTTCOAT4wIJ MuXX161B2+PnsHdeY+ixCL6FWdrvEIv+/szn9BI+z7oDoafaxqXdYFlMwWaDDPSMKtZ0 ekChZXN7nU+lerUYztIspJg4c68ORFkYqt53KQtIDisSYSkTzMjSw3RSy1HLpUkfc9Mj qm7BufDAz0mlIaffsQyNe9xOpEmJbfLCj81mQnq1ZVKUYClSv1KD93jk6lMhj2M5ZZyO Couw5E+fPBoAGbe1ynBzg8jzFw4vBJuj2tZcVEGo6k1c9rPzfgpcWNkOz7hxt5En3aO1 ztow== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pkYudkIlGveKvDcFzqa37So6Jjrdtx5IoQhEMbIfGpmRMXdbZP3 VavYhAAcB71+vZbXub3qU7Z+EXWV4S8X/EQraDo5ax5UVME7Bg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf7GaWTmzlI1QGFsZj/CjVKeCEsobuxFLQxykjospoKh+9QAVnRypOnNrGnI2H6/m62ad0FEPf3+7rh6Jigf0gM= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d711:b0:188:c7b2:2dd with SMTP id w17-20020a170902d71100b00188c7b202ddmr79046589ply.88.1670526431719; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 11:07:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20221206024554.3826186-1-sdf@google.com> <20221206024554.3826186-2-sdf@google.com> <20221207202559.4d507ccf@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20221207202559.4d507ccf@kernel.org> From: Stanislav Fomichev Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2022 11:06:59 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 01/12] bpf: Document XDP RX metadata To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, song@kernel.org, yhs@fb.com, john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org, David Ahern , Willem de Bruijn , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , Anatoly Burakov , Alexander Lobakin , Magnus Karlsson , Maryam Tahhan , xdp-hints@xdp-project.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 8:26 PM Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Mon, 5 Dec 2022 18:45:43 -0800 Stanislav Fomichev wrote: > > +- ``bpf_xdp_metadata_rx_timestamp_supported`` returns true/false to > > + indicate whether the device supports RX timestamps > > +- ``bpf_xdp_metadata_rx_timestamp`` returns packet RX timestamp > > +- ``bpf_xdp_metadata_rx_hash_supported`` returns true/false to > > + indicate whether the device supports RX hash > > +- ``bpf_xdp_metadata_rx_hash`` returns packet RX hash > > Would you mind pointing to the discussion about the separate > _supported() kfuncs? I recall folks had concerns about the function > call overhead, and now we have 2 calls per field? :S Take a look at [0] and [1]. I'm still assuming that we might support some restricted set of kfuncs that can be unrolled so keeping this simple/separate apis. 0: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAADnVQJMvPjXCtKNH+WCryPmukgbWTrJyHqxrnO=2YraZEukPg@mail.gmail.com 1: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/Y4XZkZJHVvLgTIk9@lavr/