From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933135AbbA2BwT (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jan 2015 20:52:19 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.136]:49761 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932973AbbA2BwN (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jan 2015 20:52:13 -0500 Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 13:24:15 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Alexei Starovoitov Cc: Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , Namhyung Kim , Jiri Olsa , Masami Hiramatsu , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 linux-trace 4/8] samples: bpf: simple tracing example in C Message-ID: <20150128162415.GO7220@kernel.org> References: <1422417973-10195-1-git-send-email-ast@plumgrid.com> <1422417973-10195-5-git-send-email-ast@plumgrid.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1422417973-10195-5-git-send-email-ast@plumgrid.com> X-Url: http://acmel.wordpress.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Em Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 08:06:09PM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov escreveu: > diff --git a/samples/bpf/tracex1_kern.c b/samples/bpf/tracex1_kern.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..7849ceb4bce6 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/samples/bpf/tracex1_kern.c > @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ > +#include > +#include > +#include > +#include > +#include "bpf_helpers.h" > + > +SEC("events/net/netif_receive_skb") > +int bpf_prog1(struct bpf_context *ctx) > +{ > + /* > + * attaches to /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/events/net/netif_receive_skb > + * prints events for loobpack device only > + */ > + char devname[] = "lo"; > + struct net_device *dev; > + struct sk_buff *skb = 0; > + > + skb = (struct sk_buff *) ctx->arg1; > + dev = bpf_fetch_ptr(&skb->dev); > + if (bpf_memcmp(dev->name, devname, 2) == 0) I'm only starting to look at all this, so bear with me... But why do we need to have it as "bpf_memcmp"? Can't we simply use it as "memcmp" and have it use the right function? Less typing, perhaps we would need to have a: #define memcmp bpf_memcmp(s1, s2, n) bpf_memcmp(s1, s2, n) in bpf_helpers.h to have it work? - Arnaldo > + /* print event using default tracepoint format */ > + return 1; > + > + /* drop event */ > + return 0; > +}