Re: [RFC PATCH v4 10/29] bpf tools: Collect map definitions from 'maps' section

From: Wangnan (F)
Date: Fri May 29 2015 - 00:00:31 EST




On 2015/5/29 11:35, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 03:14:44PM +0800, Wangnan (F) wrote:

On 2015/5/28 14:09, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 11:09:50AM +0800, Wangnan (F) wrote:
However this breaks a law in current design that opening phase doesn't
talk to kernel with sys_bpf() at all. All related staff is done in loading
phase. This principle ensures that in every systems, no matter it support
sys_bpf() or not, can read eBPF object without failure.
I see, so you want 'parse elf' and 'create maps + load programs'
to be separate phases?
Fair enough. Then please add a call to release the information
collected from elf after program loading is done.
relocations and other things are not needed at that point.
What about appending a flag into bpf_object__load() to let it know
whether to cleanup resource it taken or not? for example:

int bpf_object__load(struct bpf_object *obj, bool clean);

then we can further wrap it by a macro:

#define bpf_object__load_clean(o) bpf_object__load(o, true)

If 'clear' is true, after loading resources will be freed, and the same
object will be unable to reload again after unload. B doing this we can
avoid adding a new function.
imo that would be an ugly API. You only want to do that to have
one less library API function? I think it's cleaner to let user of
the library call it when necessary.
Or do cleaning unconditionally. I don't see a use case when the
same set of maps and programs would need to be loaded twice into the kernel.

OK. Let bpf_object__load() clean resources unconditionally.

Thank you.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/