All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tianyi Chen <diannaaav@gmail.com>
To: qmo@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v5 0/2] bpftool: Support symbolic map creation flags
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 11:46:56 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260911034658.219396-1-diannaaav@gmail.com> (raw)

Add comma-separated BPF_F_* names to map create flags, with matching
documentation, completion and selftests.

Changes in v5:
- State explicitly that the old numeric parser accepted empty input as
  zero and could truncate or wrap out-of-range values. Rejecting those
  inputs is an intentional compatibility change already present in v4.
- Explain why BPF_F_PATH_FD is excluded from map creation flags.
- Point the manual to feature list_builtins map_create_flags for the
  accepted symbolic names and rewrap the feature documentation.

The parser and tests are unchanged from v4.

v4: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260911025044.190540-1-diannaaav@gmail.com
Review: https://lore.kernel.org/r/523c73e7f76e0634a3e061e76ca4c39eb21cb006fc78875ddaf6a35e38bfd500@mail.kernel.org

Validation:
- Rebuilt bpftool, its manual pages and the focused selftest runner.
- All 29 bpftool_map_flags subtests passed. The three revised series
  were tested together: 52 subtests passed with no skips or failures in
  an x86-64 KVM guest running Linux 7.3.0-rc2 from bpf/master, with
  LLVM 20-built BPF test objects.
- Bash syntax, bpftool synchronization checks and diff checks passed.
- The generated patches apply cleanly to current bpf-next.

This was a focused run. Unrelated selftests requiring unavailable kernel
features were excluded from the build with PERMISSIVE=1.

Tianyi Chen (2):
  bpftool: Accept symbolic map creation flags
  selftests/bpf: Cover symbolic bpftool map creation flags

 .../bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-feature.rst |  16 +--
 .../bpf/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-map.rst |  15 ++-
 tools/bpf/bpftool/bash-completion/bpftool     |  22 +++-
 tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c                   |   7 +-
 tools/bpf/bpftool/main.h                      |   1 +
 tools/bpf/bpftool/map.c                       |  86 ++++++++++++++-
 .../bpf/prog_tests/bpftool_map_flags.c        | 100 ++++++++++++++++++
 7 files changed, 231 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpftool_map_flags.c


base-commit: af0b84a9215d951d16f26b7ee34353b970cf5d4e
-- 
2.55.0


             reply	other threads:[~2026-09-11  3:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-11  3:46 Tianyi Chen [this message]
2026-09-11  3:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v5 1/2] bpftool: Accept symbolic map creation flags Tianyi Chen
2026-09-11  3:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v5 2/2] selftests/bpf: Cover symbolic bpftool " Tianyi Chen

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=20260911034658.219396-1-diannaaav@gmail.com \
    --to=diannaaav@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=qmo@kernel.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.