Re: [PATCH bpf-next 06/12] bpf: Count missed stats in trace_call_bpf

[Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 10:32:05AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 12:56 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Increase misses stats in case bpf array execution is skipped
> > because of recursion check in trace_call_bpf.
> >
> > Adding bpf_prog_missed_array that increase misses counts for
> > all bpf programs in bpf_prog_array.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/bpf.h      | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> >  kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c |  3 +++
> >  2 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
> > index 23a73f52c7bc..71154e991730 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/bpf.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
> > @@ -2932,6 +2932,22 @@ static inline int sock_map_bpf_prog_query(const union bpf_attr *attr,
> >  #endif /* CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL */
> >  #endif /* CONFIG_NET && CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL */
> >
> > +static __always_inline void
> > +bpf_prog_missed_array(const struct bpf_prog_array *array)
> 
> The name hardly explains the purpose.
> Please give it a better name.
> Maybe bpf_prog_inc_misses_counters ?
> Just extra "s".

I thought making it similar to bpf_prog_run_array,
but bpf_prog_inc_misses_counters sounds better

thanks,
jirka