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
next 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.