Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] libbpf: Move opts code into dedicated header

[Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>]

On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 10:01:05AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 9:46 AM Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com> wrote:
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>
> > ---
> >  tools/include/tools/opts.h      | 68 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c             |  1 +
> >  tools/lib/bpf/btf.c             |  1 +
> >  tools/lib/bpf/btf_dump.c        |  1 +
> >  tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c          |  3 +-
> >  tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h | 48 -----------------------------
> >  tools/lib/bpf/linker.c          |  1 +
> >  tools/lib/bpf/netlink.c         |  1 +
> >  tools/lib/bpf/ringbuf.c         |  1 +
> >  9 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)
> >
> 
> Nope, sorry, I don't think I want to do this for libbpf. This will
> just make Github synchronization trickier, and I don't really see a
> point.
> 
> I'm totally fine with libperf making a copy of these helpers, though
> (this is not complicated or tricky code). I also don't think it will
> change much, so there is little risk of any sort of divergence.

I did this because there were two comments on the previous version of
this patch that asked to change the functions that were copied over.  I
had a couple of choices, have the implementations diverge, not change
the implementation in perf to keep it the same as bpf, update both perf
and bpf, or share the implementations. I figured the last option was the
best to avoid immediate divergence. However, both of the comments can be
safely ignored, and also perhaps divergence doesn't matter.

- Charlie

> 
> [...]