bpf.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org,
	daniel@iogearbox.net, yonghong.song@linux.dev, song@kernel.org,
	eddyz87@gmail.com, dxu@dxuuu.xyz, deso@posteo.net,
	kernel-patches-bot@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] bpf, libbpf: Support BPF_F_CPU for percpu_array map
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 01:13:09 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f05cb3d9-b9dd-4ef6-9943-b98224be2f13@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEf4BzYNRwgqbBN3QiPxMbsbtYOoV1Da3mqMhtgE8jPw6eYUXw@mail.gmail.com>



On 2025/7/18 23:57, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 12:38 PM Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev> wrote:
>>
>> This patch adds libbpf support for the BPF_F_CPU flag in percpu_array maps,
>> introducing the following APIs:
>>
>> 1. bpf_map_update_elem_opts(): update with struct bpf_map_update_elem_opts
>> 2. bpf_map_lookup_elem_opts(): lookup with struct bpf_map_lookup_elem_opts
>> 3. bpf_map__update_elem_opts(): high-level wrapper with input validation
>> 4. bpf_map__lookup_elem_opts(): high-level wrapper with input validation
>>
>> Behavior:
>>
>> * If opts->cpu == (u32)~0, the update is applied to all CPUs.
>> * Otherwise, it applies only to the specified CPU.
>> * Lookup APIs retrieve values from the target CPU when BPF_F_CPU is used.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
>> ---
> 
> please use "libbpf: " prefix, not "bpf,libbpf:"
> 

Ack.

> 
> Then see my comment on flags vs separate field for cpu passing. If we
> go with just using flags, then I'd probably drop all the new libbpf
> APIs, because we already have bpf_map_lookup_elem_flags() and
> bpf_map_update_elem() (the latter accepts flags), so as far as
> low-level API we are good.
> 

All the new libbpf APIs are unnecessary when pass the cpu through flags.

> The comment describing the new BPF_F_CPU flag is good, so let's add
> it, but place it into bpf_map__lookup_elem() description (which, btw,
> also accepts flags, so no changes to API itself is necessary). Same
> for bpf_map__update_elem().
> 

No problem.

> validate_map_op() logic will stay, but just will extract cpu from flags, right?
> 

Yes, it is.

> So overall less API churn, but same possibilities for users (plus we
> get better documentation, which is always nice).
> 

When users want to use this feature, they should follow the libbpf API's
documentation, no matter whether the cpu is separated or flags-embedded.

Thanks,
Leon

>>  tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c           | 23 ++++++++++++++
>>  tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h           | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++-
>>  tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c        | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>  tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h        | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>  tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.map      |  5 ++++
>>  tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_common.h | 14 +++++++++
>>  6 files changed, 173 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>
> 
> [...]


  reply	other threads:[~2025-07-21 17:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-07-17 19:37 [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] bpf: Introduce BPF_F_CPU flag for percpu_array map Leon Hwang
2025-07-17 19:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] " Leon Hwang
2025-07-18 15:52   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2025-07-21 17:08     ` Leon Hwang
2025-07-21 17:11       ` Eduard Zingerman
2025-07-22 14:29         ` Leon Hwang
2025-07-17 19:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] bpf, libbpf: Support BPF_F_CPU " Leon Hwang
2025-07-18 15:57   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2025-07-21 17:13     ` Leon Hwang [this message]
2025-07-17 19:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] selftests/bpf: Add case to test BPF_F_CPU 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=f05cb3d9-b9dd-4ef6-9943-b98224be2f13@linux.dev \
    --to=leon.hwang@linux.dev \
    --cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=deso@posteo.net \
    --cc=dxu@dxuuu.xyz \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-patches-bot@fb.com \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).