From: Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com>
To: Wang Yufen <wangyufen@huawei.com>,
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, sdf@google.com,
haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net,
kuba@kernel.org, hawk@kernel.org, nathan@kernel.org,
ndesaulniers@google.com, trix@redhat.com
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [bpf-next v3 1/2] bpftool: Add auto_attach for bpf prog load|loadall
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2022 12:38:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f0d30049-72b1-0f54-8f2f-fd47e75f71c9@isovalent.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1662702807-591-1-git-send-email-wangyufen@huawei.com>
On 09/09/2022 06:53, Wang Yufen wrote:
> Add auto_attach optional to support one-step load-attach-pin_link.
>
> For example,
> $ bpftool prog loadall test.o /sys/fs/bpf/test auto_attach
>
> $ bpftool link
> 26: tracing name test1 tag f0da7d0058c00236 gpl
> loaded_at 2022-09-09T21:39:49+0800 uid 0
> xlated 88B jited 55B memlock 4096B map_ids 3
> btf_id 55
> 28: kprobe name test3 tag 002ef1bef0723833 gpl
> loaded_at 2022-09-09T21:39:49+0800 uid 0
> xlated 88B jited 56B memlock 4096B map_ids 3
> btf_id 55
> 57: tracepoint name oncpu tag 7aa55dfbdcb78941 gpl
> loaded_at 2022-09-09T21:41:32+0800 uid 0
> xlated 456B jited 265B memlock 4096B map_ids 17,13,14,15
> btf_id 82
>
> $ bpftool link
> 1: tracing prog 26
> prog_type tracing attach_type trace_fentry
> 3: perf_event prog 28
> 10: perf_event prog 57
>
> The auto_attach optional can support tracepoints, k(ret)probes,
> u(ret)probes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <weiyongjun1@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Yufen <wangyufen@huawei.com>
Thanks, looks better! I just have some minor comments, please see inline
below.
> ---
> v2 -> v3: switch to extend prog load command instead of extend perf
> v2: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20220824033837.458197-1-weiyongjun1@huawei.com/
> v1: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20220816151725.153343-1-weiyongjun1@huawei.com/
> tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
> index c81362a..853a73e 100644
> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
> @@ -1453,6 +1453,68 @@ static int do_run(int argc, char **argv)
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static int
> +do_prog_attach_pin(struct bpf_program *prog, const char *path)
Can we rename this function please? The pattern "do_...()" looks like
one of the names for the functions we use for the subcommands via the
struct cmd. Maybe auto_attach_program()?
> +{
> + struct bpf_link *link = NULL;
Nit: No need to initialise link
> + int err;
> +
> + link = bpf_program__attach(prog);
> + err = libbpf_get_error(link);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> + err = bpf_link__pin(link, path);
> + if (err) {
> + bpf_link__destroy(link);
> + return err;
> + }
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int pathname_concat(const char *path, const char *name, char *buf)
> +{
> + int len;
> +
> + len = snprintf(buf, PATH_MAX, "%s/%s", path, name);
> + if (len < 0)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + else if (len >= PATH_MAX)
Nit: "else" not necessary, you returned if len < 0.
> + return -ENAMETOOLONG;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int
> +do_obj_attach_pin_programs(struct bpf_object *obj, const char *path)
Same, can we rename this function please?
> +{
> + struct bpf_program *prog;
> + char buf[PATH_MAX];
> + int err;
> +
> + bpf_object__for_each_program(prog, obj) {
> + err = pathname_concat(path, bpf_program__name(prog), buf);
> + if (err)
> + goto err_unpin_programs;
> +
> + err = do_prog_attach_pin(prog, buf);
> + if (err)
> + goto err_unpin_programs;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +err_unpin_programs:
> + while ((prog = bpf_object__prev_program(obj, prog))) {
> + if (pathname_concat(path, bpf_program__name(prog), buf))
> + continue;
> +
> + bpf_program__unpin(prog, buf);
> + }
> +
> + return err;
> +}
> +
> static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
> {
> enum bpf_prog_type common_prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_UNSPEC;
> @@ -1464,6 +1526,7 @@ static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
> struct bpf_program *prog = NULL, *pos;
> unsigned int old_map_fds = 0;
> const char *pinmaps = NULL;
> + bool auto_attach = false;
> struct bpf_object *obj;
> struct bpf_map *map;
> const char *pinfile;
> @@ -1583,6 +1646,9 @@ static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
> goto err_free_reuse_maps;
>
> pinmaps = GET_ARG();
> + } else if (is_prefix(*argv, "auto_attach")) {
> + auto_attach = true;
> + NEXT_ARG();
> } else {
> p_err("expected no more arguments, 'type', 'map' or 'dev', got: '%s'?",
> *argv);
> @@ -1692,14 +1758,20 @@ static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
> goto err_close_obj;
> }
>
> - err = bpf_obj_pin(bpf_program__fd(prog), pinfile);
> + if (auto_attach)
> + err = do_prog_attach_pin(prog, pinfile);
> + else
> + err = bpf_obj_pin(bpf_program__fd(prog), pinfile);
> if (err) {
> p_err("failed to pin program %s",
> bpf_program__section_name(prog));
> goto err_close_obj;
> }
> } else {
> - err = bpf_object__pin_programs(obj, pinfile);
> + if (auto_attach)
> + err = do_obj_attach_pin_programs(obj, pinfile);
> + else
> + err = bpf_object__pin_programs(obj, pinfile);
> if (err) {
> p_err("failed to pin all programs");
> goto err_close_obj;
Please update the usage string in do_help() at the end of the file.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-09 11:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-09 5:53 [bpf-next v3 1/2] bpftool: Add auto_attach for bpf prog load|loadall Wang Yufen
2022-09-09 5:53 ` [-next v2 2/2] bpftool: Update doc (add auto_attach to prog load) Wang Yufen
2022-09-09 6:07 ` wangyufen
2022-09-09 11:38 ` Quentin Monnet [this message]
2022-09-13 2:40 ` [bpf-next v3 1/2] bpftool: Add auto_attach for bpf prog load|loadall wangyufen
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=f0d30049-72b1-0f54-8f2f-fd47e75f71c9@isovalent.com \
--to=quentin@isovalent.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=hawk@kernel.org \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=trix@redhat.com \
--cc=wangyufen@huawei.com \
--cc=yhs@fb.com \
/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).