lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] bpf/bpftool: handle libbpf_probe_prog_type errors
On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 9:05 AM Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com> wrote:
>
> 2022-03-31 11:45 UTC-0400 ~ Milan Landaverde <milan@mdaverde.com>
> > Previously [1], we were using bpf_probe_prog_type which returned a
> > bool, but the new libbpf_probe_bpf_prog_type can return a negative
> > error code on failure. This change decides for bpftool to declare
> > a program type is not available on probe failure.
> >
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220202225916.3313522-3-andrii@kernel.org/
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Milan Landaverde <milan@mdaverde.com>
> > ---
> > tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c
> > index c2f43a5d38e0..b2fbaa7a6b15 100644
> > --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c
> > +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c
> > @@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ probe_prog_type(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, bool *supported_types,
> >
> > res = probe_prog_type_ifindex(prog_type, ifindex);
> > } else {
> > - res = libbpf_probe_bpf_prog_type(prog_type, NULL);
> > + res = libbpf_probe_bpf_prog_type(prog_type, NULL) > 0;
> > }
> >
> > #ifdef USE_LIBCAP
>

A completely unrelated question to you, Quentin. How hard is bpftool's
dependency on libcap? We've recently removed libcap from selftests, I
wonder if it would be possible to do that for bpftool as well to
reduce amount of shared libraries bpftool depends on.

> Reviewed-by: Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com>
>
> Thanks!

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-04-01 20:43    [W:0.047 / U:0.528 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site