Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] libbpf: Move opts code into dedicated header

Charlie Jenkins
2024-07-29T19:46:35Z

On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 11:59:47AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 10:55 AM Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 10:01:05AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 9:46 AM Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > tools/include/tools/opts.h | 68 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c | 1 +
> > > > tools/lib/bpf/btf.c | 1 +
> > > > tools/lib/bpf/btf_dump.c | 1 +
> > > > tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 3 +-
> > > > tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h | 48 -----------------------------
> > > > tools/lib/bpf/linker.c | 1 +
> > > > tools/lib/bpf/netlink.c | 1 +
> > > > tools/lib/bpf/ringbuf.c | 1 +
> > > > 9 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Nope, sorry, I don't think I want to do this for libbpf. This will
> > > just make Github synchronization trickier, and I don't really see a
> > > point.
> > >
> > > I'm totally fine with libperf making a copy of these helpers, though
> > > (this is not complicated or tricky code). I also don't think it will
> > > change much, so there is little risk of any sort of divergence.
> >
> > I did this because there were two comments on the previous version of
> > this patch that asked to change the functions that were copied over. I
> > had a couple of choices, have the implementations diverge, not change
> > the implementation in perf to keep it the same as bpf, update both perf
> > and bpf, or share the implementations. I figured the last option was the
> > best to avoid immediate divergence. However, both of the comments can be
> > safely ignored, and also perhaps divergence doesn't matter.
> >
>
> I mean, feel free to diverge. First and foremost the code has to make
> sense to specific library and specific use case. If libperf has some
> extra things that it needs to enforce or check, by all means. I just
> want to avoid unnecessary code sharing, given the code isn't tricky or
> complicated, but will complicate libbpf's sync story to Github (libbpf
> kind of lives in two places, kernel repo and Github repo).

Alright, I like to avoid copy-pasting code but if that's what is
required I will do that.

>
> > - Charlie
> >
> > >
> > > …