From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934109AbcKQDxx (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2016 22:53:53 -0500 Received: from relay2-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.194]:37668 "EHLO relay2-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753101AbcKQDxu (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2016 22:53:50 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 36613 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 22:53:50 EST X-Originating-IP: 209.85.214.46 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <582D265B.4000102@huawei.com> References: <20161116174324.29675-1-joe@ovn.org> <20161116174324.29675-3-joe@ovn.org> <582D11B0.80208@huawei.com> <582D265B.4000102@huawei.com> From: Joe Stringer Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:53:24 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 perf/core 2/2] tools lib bpf: Sync with samples/bpf/libbpf To: "Wangnan (F)" Cc: LKML , netdev , ast@fb.com, Daniel Borkmann , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 16 November 2016 at 19:39, Wangnan (F) wrote: > > > On 2016/11/17 10:46, Joe Stringer wrote: >> >> On 16 November 2016 at 18:10, Wangnan (F) wrote: >>> >>> I'm also working on improving bpf.c. Please have a look at: >>> >>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/14/1078 >>> >>> Since bpf.c is simple, I think we can add more functions and fixes >>> gradually, instead of a full copy. >>> >>> See my inline comment below. >> >> Ah, I missed this, my apologies. It looks like it will provide much of >> what I need, I can reassess this patch with your series in mind. >> >> One comment though for your patch (I don't have the original thread to >> respond to unfortunately): The map_pin and map_get functions in your >> patch series can be used to pin progs too, so maybe there is a better >> name? You'll see that this patch uses bpf_obj_{pin,get}() - although I >> wouldn't want those to be confused with the libbpf.c objects so maybe >> there's a clearer name that could be used. >> >> I also have some patches to rework the samples/bpf/* code to use >> libbpf instead of the sample code that is there, is it worth me >> submitting that? It will need to wait for your patch to go in, plus a >> merge with davem's tree. >> > I'm happy to see you are trying to replace samples/bpf 's own > libbpf with tools/lib/bpf. I think you can submit your work > on libbpf and patches on samples together if they are ready. > Arnaldo can pick up patches good for him, and you can improve > other patches based on his newest branch. I'll look into it.