From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: show in bpftool map overview whether btf
 is available
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 11:08:36 -0700
Message-ID: <20180718110836.3ff5f81a@cakuba.lan>
References: <20180718091942.2963-1-daniel@iogearbox.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org
To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-pg1-f171.google.com ([209.85.215.171]:39858 "EHLO
        mail-pg1-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1726158AbeGRSrn (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:47:43 -0400
Received: by mail-pg1-f171.google.com with SMTP id g2-v6so2353899pgs.6
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 11:08:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20180718091942.2963-1-daniel@iogearbox.net>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 11:19:42 +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> For a quick overview in 'bpftool map' display 'btf' if it's
> available for the dump for a specific map:
> 
>   # bpftool map list
>   11: array  flags 0x0  btf
>           key 4B  value 20B  max_entries 40  memlock 4096B
> 
>   # bpftool --json --pretty map list
>   [{
>           "id": 11,
>           "type": "array",
>           "flags": 0,
>           "btf_available": true,
>           "bytes_key": 4,
>           "bytes_value": 20,
>           "max_entries": 40,
>           "bytes_memlock": 4096
>       }
>   ]
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>

Hmm.. would it make sense to provide the actual BTF IDs instead of just
yes/no?  At least in JSON?