From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
martin.lau@kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 4/5] libbpf: add support for BPF cookie for raw_tp/tp_btf programs
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 18:24:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6a904a7257998dd5576ee18f46c204c426f10cee.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEf4BzYNCYyeZJSf0YUHf9TG2QwwqoFqgYg-C_bfe2rpHK2dAA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 2024-03-19 at 09:16 -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
[...]
> So I considered `bpf_raw_tracepoint_open_opts()`, but it felt so
> verbose that I decided to shorten it to `bpf_raw_tp_open()`, given we
> do have SEC("raw_tp") and that's very recognizable contraction.
>
> Having said that, I'm not opposed to going with
> bpf_raw_tracepoint_open_opts(), as I don't think many users will ever
> need to call it directly, so verboseness doesn't matter all that much.
>
> Let me know if you still prefer the `bpf_raw_tracepoint_open_opts()` variant.
I'd prefer the longer variant if you don't mind.
I'm a relative beginner to libbpf internals and seeing bpf_raw_tp_open
instead bpf_raw_tracepoint_open_opts kinda broke my intuitive
expectations based on other APIs, so we can use it as a test :)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-19 16:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-18 18:40 [PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/5] BPF raw tracepoint support for BPF cookie Andrii Nakryiko
2024-03-18 18:40 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/5] bpf: flatten bpf_probe_register call chain Andrii Nakryiko
2024-03-18 18:40 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 2/5] bpf: pass whole link instead of prog when triggering raw tracepoint Andrii Nakryiko
2024-03-18 18:40 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 3/5] bpf: support BPF cookie in raw tracepoint (raw_tp, tp_btf) programs Andrii Nakryiko
2024-03-19 9:19 ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-19 12:48 ` Jiri Olsa
2024-03-19 16:09 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-03-19 16:23 ` Jiri Olsa
2024-03-19 16:26 ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-18 18:40 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 4/5] libbpf: add support for BPF cookie for raw_tp/tp_btf programs Andrii Nakryiko
2024-03-19 7:20 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-03-19 16:15 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-03-19 10:41 ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-19 16:16 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-03-19 16:24 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2024-03-19 16:27 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-03-18 18:40 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 5/5] selftests/bpf: add raw_tp/tp_btf BPF cookie subtests Andrii Nakryiko
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=6a904a7257998dd5576ee18f46c204c426f10cee.camel@gmail.com \
--to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
/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