From: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
To: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@kernel.org,
kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, horms@kernel.org,
ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org,
eddyz87@gmail.com, memxor@gmail.com, martin.lau@linux.dev,
song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, jolsa@kernel.org,
emil@etsalapatis.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev, hawk@kernel.org,
john.fastabend@gmail.com, sdf@fomichev.me, rostedt@goodmis.org,
mhiramat@kernel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
shuah@kernel.org, kuniyu@google.com, liuhangbin@gmail.com,
mkarsten@uwaterloo.ca, masashi.honma@gmail.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, martin.lau@kernel.org,
mason@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 4/6] libbpf: Factor out __sys_bpf_fd helper
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2026 23:07:28 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3d70768f-8d0a-496a-ac3a-9ee3438b2091@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5d94730579f232c7be1c83bc7287e91af9a858bcea83765e58bdd2fc3956a229@mail.kernel.org>
On 2026/10/25 00:13, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org wrote:
>> libbpf: Factor out __sys_bpf_fd helper
>
> TL;DR: Nit only, not a bug: the new libbpf helper __sys_bpf_fd() has a
> misleading name and a different argument order (cmd not first) than
> sys_bpf_fd(); a name like sys_bpf_fd_log() is suggested.
>
>> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
>> index b49822d212ae..9a2107d4f6d8 100644
>> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
>> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
>> @@ -203,6 +203,30 @@ int bump_rlimit_memlock(void)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +static int __sys_bpf_fd(union bpf_attr *attr, const size_t attr_sz, enum bpf_cmd cmd,
>> + struct bpf_log_opts *log_opts)
>> +{
>> + const size_t attr_common_sz = sizeof(struct bpf_common_attr);
>> + struct bpf_common_attr attr_common;
>> + int fd;
>> +
>> + if (!OPTS_VALID(log_opts, bpf_log_opts))
>> + return libbpf_err(-EINVAL);
>> +
>> + if (log_opts && feat_supported(NULL, FEAT_BPF_SYSCALL_COMMON_ATTRS)) {
>> + memset(&attr_common, 0, attr_common_sz);
>> + attr_common.log_buf = ptr_to_u64(OPTS_GET(log_opts, buf, NULL));
>> + attr_common.log_size = OPTS_GET(log_opts, size, 0);
>> + attr_common.log_level = OPTS_GET(log_opts, level, 0);
>> + fd = sys_bpf_ext_fd(cmd, attr, attr_sz, &attr_common, attr_common_sz);
>> + OPTS_SET(log_opts, true_size, attr_common.log_true_size);
>> + } else {
>> + fd = sys_bpf_fd(cmd, attr, attr_sz);
>> + OPTS_SET(log_opts, true_size, 0);
>> + }
>> + return fd;
>> +}
>> +
>
> [ ... ]
>
>> @@ -248,20 +270,7 @@ int bpf_map_create(enum bpf_map_type map_type,
>> attr.excl_prog_hash_size = OPTS_GET(opts, excl_prog_hash_size, 0);
>>
>> log_opts = OPTS_GET(opts, log_opts, NULL);
>> - if (!OPTS_VALID(log_opts, bpf_log_opts))
>> - return libbpf_err(-EINVAL);
>> -
>> - if (log_opts && feat_supported(NULL, FEAT_BPF_SYSCALL_COMMON_ATTRS)) {
>> - memset(&attr_common, 0, attr_common_sz);
>> - attr_common.log_buf = ptr_to_u64(OPTS_GET(log_opts, buf, NULL));
>> - attr_common.log_size = OPTS_GET(log_opts, size, 0);
>> - attr_common.log_level = OPTS_GET(log_opts, level, 0);
>> - fd = sys_bpf_ext_fd(BPF_MAP_CREATE, &attr, attr_sz, &attr_common, attr_common_sz);
>> - OPTS_SET(log_opts, true_size, attr_common.log_true_size);
>> - } else {
>> - fd = sys_bpf_fd(BPF_MAP_CREATE, &attr, attr_sz);
>> - OPTS_SET(log_opts, true_size, 0);
>> - }
>> + fd = __sys_bpf_fd(&attr, attr_sz, BPF_MAP_CREATE, log_opts);
>> return libbpf_err_errno(fd);
>> }
>
> This isn't a bug, but __sys_bpf_fd() is a higher-level wrapper that
> dispatches to sys_bpf_fd() or sys_bpf_ext_fd() after validating log_opts and
> probing FEAT_BPF_SYSCALL_COMMON_ATTRS, while a leading double underscore
> usually marks the lower-level variant of a function.
>
> The helper also takes (attr, attr_sz, cmd, log_opts), whereas sys_bpf(),
> sys_bpf_fd(), sys_bpf_ext() and sys_bpf_ext_fd() all take cmd first, so the
> new call reads differently from the nearby calls:
>
> fd = __sys_bpf_fd(&attr, attr_sz, BPF_MAP_CREATE, log_opts);
>
> Would a name that describes what the helper adds (for example something like
> sys_bpf_fd_log()), with cmd as the first argument like the other sys_bpf*()
> wrappers, read more naturally next to sys_bpf_fd() and sys_bpf_ext_fd()?
>
I'd like to move cmd as the first argument, and keep name __sys_bpf_fd()
for the helper.
Thanks,
Leon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-26 15:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-24 15:36 [PATCH bpf-next v4 0/6] bpf: Add syscall common attrs support for xdp link_create Leon Hwang
2026-10-24 15:36 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/6] bpf: Add syscall common attrs support for link_create Leon Hwang
2026-10-24 15:50 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-24 15:36 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/6] bpf: Add syscall common attrs support for xdp link_create Leon Hwang
2026-10-25 1:19 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-10-26 15:06 ` Leon Hwang
2026-10-24 15:36 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 3/6] bpf: Retire tracepoint bpf_xdp_link_attach_failed Leon Hwang
2026-10-24 15:36 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 4/6] libbpf: Factor out __sys_bpf_fd helper Leon Hwang
2026-10-24 16:13 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-26 15:07 ` Leon Hwang [this message]
2026-10-24 15:36 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 5/6] libbpf: Add log_opts support for bpf_link_create Leon Hwang
2026-10-24 16:13 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-26 15:08 ` Leon Hwang
2026-10-24 15:36 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 6/6] selftests/bpf: Add tests to verify link_create logs Leon Hwang
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=3d70768f-8d0a-496a-ac3a-9ee3438b2091@linux.dev \
--to=leon.hwang@linux.dev \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=edumazet@kernel.org \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=hawk@kernel.org \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kuniyu@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liuhangbin@gmail.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=masashi.honma@gmail.com \
--cc=mason@kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=mkarsten@uwaterloo.ca \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox