Re: libxsk move from libbpf to libxdp

["Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>]

Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@gmail.com> writes:

> On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 7:49 PM Andrii Nakryiko
> <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hey guys,
>>
>> It's been a while since we chatted about libxsk move. I believe last
>> time we were already almost ready to recommend libxdp for this, but
>> I'd like to double-check. Can one of you please own [0], validate that
>> whatever APIs are provided by libxdp are equivalent to what libbpf
>> provides, and start marking xdk.h APIs as deprecated? Thanks!
>
> Resending since Gmail had jumped out of plain text mode again.
>
> No problem, I will own this. I will verify the APIs are the same then
> submit a patch marking the ones in libbpf's xsk.h as deprecated.
>
> One question is what to do with the samples and the selftests for xsk.
> They currently rely on libbpf's xsk support. Two options that I see:
>
> 1: Require libxdp on the system. Do not try to compile the xsk samples
> and selftests if libxdp is not available so the rest of the bpf
> samples and selftests are not impacted.
> 2: Provide a standalone mock-up file of xsk.c and xsk.h that samples
> and selftests could use.
>
> I prefer #1 as it is better for the long-term. #2 means I would have
> to maintain that mock-up file as libxdp features are added. Sounds
> like double the amount of work to me. Thoughts?

I agree #1 is preferable of those two. Another option is to move the
samples to the xdp-tools repo instead? Doesn't work for selftests, of
course; if it's acceptable to conditionally-compile the XSK tests
depending on system library availability that would be fine by me...

I pinged the Debian maintainer of libbpf to see if I can get him to pick
up libxdp as well, or sponsor me to maintain it. Should make the
transition smoother; guess I also need to get hold of the OpenSuse
people.

-Toke