From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pf1-f180.google.com (mail-pf1-f180.google.com [209.85.210.180]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A448186E40 for ; Wed, 17 Dec 2025 19:35:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.180 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1766000152; cv=none; b=OoCogjxMis7acIzkqaP4DVH0yXk8nQSV91RlrTJGGVyPWJVfhcNGYj6MxPbkoj3JKFyyW4yj+7o6HSzaqFReymio+1SKiAn7romDwudp/R2CENNm+JFSvuDkK9kYJynXMwsXQvFuBUN9IF4ROGzU59w9UhaTDLE23pGoKSY4/OA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1766000152; c=relaxed/simple; bh=UoeXfx8EG7vyi2BOz3f7XsIoyaooHYovfybXMPLb0fI=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=MsAecFVtRehUH1yNn+0bVaIGlDVOxc3Xh1JR9yaG0+xjh2CZryoMKY0VcPN4Uj2PrABLEbEmd9LNDCLy8Xe3FTSgHk6kdA2hnt6XdpKTz0cVG0JOUjObcfCKjmW3bKcDEwPyoIkr+baQmeBeSbtlbt5LOdH1S0lk3o+qS4wKp/k= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=YxZ1D38o; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.180 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="YxZ1D38o" Received: by mail-pf1-f180.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-7b7828bf7bcso6669646b3a.2 for ; Wed, 17 Dec 2025 11:35:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1766000150; x=1766604950; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=mime-version:user-agent:content-transfer-encoding:references :in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=UoeXfx8EG7vyi2BOz3f7XsIoyaooHYovfybXMPLb0fI=; b=YxZ1D38oxnh/u5ur65CAW6nQui1pl41PtgaOhUQrUDnavgfR3fXuG/V8pKMvJ7zd/2 t5P+miMoxg2jmBwQidN3YOTbNTx/3Ugdx6T9KKG/inOrTsGg///NjXVU9ArEGmYuCiAJ Vzqkc8c6EKBqcCkgu8blu4FSE0couwca2w0Q9SR98zh5ErCiAuSobwAS47IGjR6nlhEk JZuEEhOjE0hsgZgrLZW/EVxXEnFGXwS5cuIcxxOE/OmrVvTSmZ24Qd1kiFERe03iY56E Cjlzobr+LOryhGvePPvPClI3bismI8vWm2ZgJfg8grKoAKejaReJ7vAC1e3VCh/XUJHz 4bQQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1766000150; x=1766604950; h=mime-version:user-agent:content-transfer-encoding:references :in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=UoeXfx8EG7vyi2BOz3f7XsIoyaooHYovfybXMPLb0fI=; b=fF3w+P+Hw+a64EWSrXoOk4zhU0Uo8oA9mn2F7WEz+d8jgHVdcPSNnDbODA75a8MEfz lRUD2SyU0Yj3Nq/304a5CvPdp4YOW3qY9M/H7BDr69XW8qS308Zsaavq02pI4avLA6mf QaFsTypusIfoB2KkeUOj9LikoRLn3vbWYiNCVD6UKXS1/1+om6LIO9EzEalMhhErGeGB 0RRjKlcIrYDumsTrvKSZ3pNGUM8a0FWIVxCCg9/EzQTXw60eXiCpHwYVCJ1oUDyxg673 rxx32uqHtDzRZmpP/LOurVYQpkL5eqKbQ21u5jwZdrhYtTwEG0ycWlzvlU/mSXCWj0KP G94A== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXsRBxXpj96K8gftWl1pjZSSnO55PoHfHs68qSVUp6I02x0bj9ct4SCGSu9Ue45Edh47Yc=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyHfxYEIAuehv2pF77fZhz9m34xz3sOfHQIEvmBM/nGev7QLGBx rnsfm0WabqLH6QLHO5A2mXK0DgS7AR3XC2tiAxRNI+DG7Gz+8y95KgHK X-Gm-Gg: AY/fxX7jKt8g/X2qXgyniNyXjffxA3pQKMFgiGe5aoYuv3PxIaLfVTJTr/TpNOaJWbl qV177H0gLBF8JaXM3TGs9yYDakFMYDAZ4aGJGly1DHrDMwtEkPr9uWa9CvAZQcoZ2RUIBT4s4nC x9Vu3WBlO9+amMiYDFpR58SELSWzaoS9lqFbMsnUj5nb862GZ3KRdD4mbmDuP9M/4Vzpz5ShiR9 rXkaASlujUPbbWc0oildH8MEuqUYe1VmcVnz62yeHFkbzMc21SFJpEbP0MYRDTReChAg6P4m1M6 8Bx5/tCGnOi3PAUHvFDdfv0mN8LU9E4Sf+uwMymV53xylBIIbMIaSvt+zJnZVBS3FjnWAEdYHg1 huVPFKZn7s0xM4GUJwBKuNBwjcRpLudHsbe1C1aKOhJuMvrv+gSmZsi/l10F/luvsf2jZkAY4hP 9hItL457zKv1FmGxC/oqSlMz4XUJ9o7jbXpGCNRtuMT9TIX+g= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG8iik5PnYG7XLtaYqGEcj0BxlMsUbN/BZkk4zxGPnA9iT7j3dg4UsjgNFRsIhfwgQLg6oheA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:1d0a:b0:7bf:5011:d1e0 with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-7f667445ce2mr17078384b3a.2.1766000150216; Wed, 17 Dec 2025 11:35:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2a03:83e0:115c:1:9f95:2f12:bb69:e3e6? ([2620:10d:c090:500::7:a4ff]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d2e1a72fcca58-7fe14761014sm234904b3a.62.2025.12.17.11.35.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 17 Dec 2025 11:35:49 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3071012cc1e8d6bdf16b13d371a12cb201c502a7.camel@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] libbpf: add option to force-anonymize nested structs for BTF dump From: Eduard Zingerman To: Alan Maguire , Alexei Starovoitov Cc: Andrii Nakryiko , Quentin Monnet , Andrii Nakryiko , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , John Fastabend , KP Singh , Stanislav Fomichev , Hao Luo , Jiri Olsa , bpf Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2025 11:35:48 -0800 In-Reply-To: References: <20251216171854.2291424-1-alan.maguire@oracle.com> <20251216171854.2291424-2-alan.maguire@oracle.com> <9a096b2a16d552031a12f3f4f5a2c725212df5e6.camel@gmail.com> <6ae6dfd8-3f73-4318-93c1-97541d267a28@oracle.com> <535846f7-4cc7-4b12-aab4-52e530d04706@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.56.2 (3.56.2-2.fc42) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Wed, 2025-12-17 at 11:34 -0800, Eduard Zingerman wrote: > On Wed, 2025-12-17 at 18:41 +0000, Alan Maguire wrote: >=20 > [...] >=20 > > So maybe the best we can do here is something like the following at the= top > > of vmlinux.h: > >=20 > > #ifndef BPF_USE_MS_EXTENSIONS > > #if __has_builtin(__builtin_FUNCSIG) || defined(_MSC_EXTENSIONS) > > #define BPF_USE_MS_EXTENSIONS > > #endif > > #endif > >=20 > > ...and then guard using #ifdef BPF_USE_MS_EXTENSIONS > >=20 > > That will work on clang and perhaps at some point work on gcc, but also > > gives the user the option to supply a macro to force use in cases where > > there is no detection available. >=20 > Are we sure we need such flexibility? > Maybe just stick with current implementation and unroll the structures > unconditionally? I mean, the point of the extension is to make the code smaller. But here we are expanding it instead, so why bother?