Linux Kernel Selftest development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tianyi Chen <diannaaav@gmail.com>
To: qmo@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v5 0/2] bpftool: Support symbolic map creation flags
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 11:46:56 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260911034658.219396-1-diannaaav@gmail.com> (raw)

Add comma-separated BPF_F_* names to map create flags, with matching
documentation, completion and selftests.

Changes in v5:
- State explicitly that the old numeric parser accepted empty input as
  zero and could truncate or wrap out-of-range values. Rejecting those
  inputs is an intentional compatibility change already present in v4.
- Explain why BPF_F_PATH_FD is excluded from map creation flags.
- Point the manual to feature list_builtins map_create_flags for the
  accepted symbolic names and rewrap the feature documentation.

The parser and tests are unchanged from v4.

v4: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260911025044.190540-1-diannaaav@gmail.com
Review: https://lore.kernel.org/r/523c73e7f76e0634a3e061e76ca4c39eb21cb006fc78875ddaf6a35e38bfd500@mail.kernel.org

Validation:
- Rebuilt bpftool, its manual pages and the focused selftest runner.
- All 29 bpftool_map_flags subtests passed. The three revised series
  were tested together: 52 subtests passed with no skips or failures in
  an x86-64 KVM guest running Linux 7.3.0-rc2 from bpf/master, with
  LLVM 20-built BPF test objects.
- Bash syntax, bpftool synchronization checks and diff checks passed.
- The generated patches apply cleanly to current bpf-next.

This was a focused run. Unrelated selftests requiring unavailable kernel
features were excluded from the build with PERMISSIVE=1.

Tianyi Chen (2):
  bpftool: Accept symbolic map creation flags
  selftests/bpf: Cover symbolic bpftool map creation flags

 .../bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-feature.rst |  16 +--
 .../bpf/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-map.rst |  15 ++-
 tools/bpf/bpftool/bash-completion/bpftool     |  22 +++-
 tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c                   |   7 +-
 tools/bpf/bpftool/main.h                      |   1 +
 tools/bpf/bpftool/map.c                       |  86 ++++++++++++++-
 .../bpf/prog_tests/bpftool_map_flags.c        | 100 ++++++++++++++++++
 7 files changed, 231 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpftool_map_flags.c


base-commit: af0b84a9215d951d16f26b7ee34353b970cf5d4e
-- 
2.55.0


             reply	other threads:[~2026-09-11  3:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-11  3:46 Tianyi Chen [this message]
2026-09-11  3:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v5 1/2] bpftool: Accept symbolic map creation flags Tianyi Chen
2026-09-11  3:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v5 2/2] selftests/bpf: Cover symbolic bpftool " Tianyi Chen

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=20260911034658.219396-1-diannaaav@gmail.com \
    --to=diannaaav@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=qmo@kernel.org \
    /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