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 mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08775C433FE for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 04:12:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D59A061AD2 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 04:12:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233029AbhKSEPD (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Nov 2021 23:15:03 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33244 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232098AbhKSEPC (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Nov 2021 23:15:02 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-x634.google.com (mail-pl1-x634.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::634]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8CF4C061574; Thu, 18 Nov 2021 20:12:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pl1-x634.google.com with SMTP id p18so7097925plf.13; Thu, 18 Nov 2021 20:12:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=eEqSzygGSjhx2aXkg9j1/S8ZDkmYqyyREKYjNrWoQRQ=; b=AZ6HHEJKc2X08STGDE0jNV96OVQKQb/JxZl+3vIp3dUqEnOIuOZcwYpiPjtNYcOc3J H3wmOmBROOY3o7dhy7bdnq8FR/9GyJxQ5VbE/DoEGQv9oaagVhRpAV2iQj9BE6cPV0HQ vLC14rWbWYFsN1u9g8HL6YYGMw5PQ69cgeHERaTv/PW2yprnzm11z0x07y4qkgTnYe2x hrq/adLfsWfN2F0BdTcZYd6W3sVlYwGlKFUZHNck6DmbSbadq+Cm0HpG9rUhGaB6ECHw X0oM5egr7eI4veYVGrviePMpam4MmbRxXR99iFn5DbT0xIxk5uTmMd8yeX76tos+zkDX avyw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=eEqSzygGSjhx2aXkg9j1/S8ZDkmYqyyREKYjNrWoQRQ=; b=Yh9fJbZLAHnYYuGROWTwA8TlRwpN8g6QMwphpFpHMLUq3n9BfmD/V/u3PbcWw3ALGx BLGR51rs4qLFDj9glEEpiblG7xUpM/rLz7PExpZ8jYqPILE2GxzHNb8cXPClH1U+7923 orJIzjxZDzDAWJdxEEvFXZdrLIyELOEHvASJFEwBO29B7BZfa7iXdITJmqRKRO1f3Ys6 x//QDqest5c4ZwuAavTVLi1xywdxujgrzF5LjoP+dBvRuQqwRHHyhNv4JJS8xmi+djqM 2fcs4NMzaErOZW/BqZAHZ+4BqX38/bpeZDgJglQC9OD/Z74/cKM2yzkaQFseIlRRu3AT MaKQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530mCd4kDSEdjSOD9T30ib999+lGorIjyqSAX6mGWtMzLXK9MEe9 ADLaGhx6KZmCM80g8Z9pxeY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyVlTazncf0DoICoxC0P2NqXV4h9fo1k/eqZqaeA5JMYYtV7eGK+v/2KuKVx71d75TxcRu+Dg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:249:b0:143:c077:59d3 with SMTP id j9-20020a170903024900b00143c07759d3mr51798503plh.26.1637295121130; Thu, 18 Nov 2021 20:12:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com ([2620:10d:c090:400::5:4e33]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id oa17sm896935pjb.37.2021.11.18.20.11.59 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 18 Nov 2021 20:12:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 20:11:59 -0800 From: Alexei Starovoitov To: Jiri Olsa Cc: Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , John Fastabend , KP Singh Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 09/29] bpf: Add support to load multi func tracing program Message-ID: <20211119041159.7rebb5lz2ybnygqr@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com> References: <20211118112455.475349-1-jolsa@kernel.org> <20211118112455.475349-10-jolsa@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20211118112455.475349-10-jolsa@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 12:24:35PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > + > +DEFINE_BPF_MULTI_FUNC(unsigned long a1, unsigned long a2, > + unsigned long a3, unsigned long a4, > + unsigned long a5, unsigned long a6) This is probably a bit too x86 specific. May be make add all 12 args? Or other places would need to be tweaked? > +BTF_ID_LIST_SINGLE(bpf_multi_func_btf_id, func, bpf_multi_func) ... > - prog->aux->attach_btf_id = attr->attach_btf_id; > + prog->aux->attach_btf_id = multi_func ? bpf_multi_func_btf_id[0] : attr->attach_btf_id; Just ignoring that was passed in uattr? Maybe instead of ignoring dopr BPF_F_MULTI_FUNC and make libbpf point to that btf_id instead? Then multi or not can be checked with if (attr->attach_btf_id == bpf_multi_func_btf_id[0]).