From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-172.mta1.migadu.com (out-172.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.172]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D273A1A6827 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2026 20:55:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774644943; cv=none; b=etPW6OhnCJhL03Ii0wS2SZT65mBNVhOzlSwH0Pega/7H0mKlqy3sZlP3DX3Kyc1loTEkr2+OwvEtBdqrI354U196skvFhVEOzmeE9EvABqIDB/xXP//uUciOpXhaJYTPDZ6oHFMuCmLaSNaE0xeGtVLf35E0PJbX5jbHvKvEPsE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774644943; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ikIhOhiD3m2+pifKDVmwVFRLv/ifaN8zysX2YJeuFbE=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=qXxjs/jC5tzvJfKFrrzbWMVQpk6e6gZAULwNe0ss7apwEnaoKmHiIo/zr96sH/MgBcZ/tZNrsjkR9zyPZiMlHREDx/fMKzfbQoSGg2A1m/Vo8zlQxaiGchN6EzcettW53TD++iYl3YsJjKk/NLAEEwHDTDZuQ2P+3q/MZUohDnw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=k/kW82SD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="k/kW82SD" Message-ID: <676332b5-1f7f-4c8d-b41e-e2dbbc1d7e4e@linux.dev> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1774644937; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=0aHef+GvUQu5lvLgebrYAYak1bZiz01bUSgW0M62JXI=; b=k/kW82SDPtJ5hJf9Tbski6DMaUbMyEoFz8WmwnZcKrAftia4VfBJr351fscUGWDgNUVhMG 3/oyQWRE/1BhQCWIC4AJ7dG52wl1v6yt//g7e+iwZrrg4aD3OuDSf255GR+sy9vGTh6MEl RtP7cB43dWiTsqmNi3GkSOyD9P+ya5E= Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 13:55:27 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/2] bpf: Support struct btf_struct_meta via KF_IMPLICIT_ARGS To: Alexei Starovoitov Cc: Alexei Starovoitov , Andrii Nakryiko , Daniel Borkmann , Eduard Zingerman , bpf , Kernel Team References: <20260318234210.1840295-1-ihor.solodrai@linux.dev> <21e5333c-0b57-46ce-99c8-f6c414270e70@linux.dev> Content-Language: en-US X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Ihor Solodrai In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On 3/27/26 1:48 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 12:13 PM Ihor Solodrai wrote: >> >> [...] >> >> The above works, and the question now is if we like this mechanism >> more than current setup with explicit enums. > > Got it. Thanks for the explanation. > Your approach does sound a lot better than explicit enums. > Make a proper patch out of it. > > If we do this can we remove approach everywhere > while at it and only use named ? This crossed my mind too. I'll try to *replace* the suffixes and if it works fine submit that. One inconvenience is that with named suffixes BTF_ID() macro will have to accept an additional arg (the list name), but I think that's ok. We already have to pass struct/func everywhere too.