Re: [PATCH bpf-next 00/17] Improve BPF syscall command documentation

Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-02-18T12:01:17Z

Joe Stringer <joe@cilium.io> writes:

> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 5:55 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Joe Stringer <joe@wand.net.nz> writes:
>> > Given the relative success of the process around bpf-helpers(7) to
>> > encourage developers to document their user-facing changes, in this
>> > patch series I explore applying this technique to bpf(2) as well.
>> > Unfortunately, even with bpf(2) being so out-of-date, there is still a
>> > lot of content to convert over. In particular, I've identified at least
>> > the following aspects of the bpf syscall which could individually be
>> > generated from separate documentation in the header:
>> > * BPF syscall commands
>> > * BPF map types
>> > * BPF program types
>> > * BPF attachment points
>>
>> Does this also include program subtypes (AKA expected_attach_type?)
>
> I seem to have left my lawyerly "including, but not limited to..."
> language at home today ;-) . Of course, I can add that to the list.

Great, thanks! :)

-Toke