пт, 5 июл. 2019 г. в 17:44, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> On 07/05/2019 10:44 PM, Anton Protopopov wrote:
> > Add a new API bpf_object__reuse_maps() which can be used to replace all maps in
> > an object by maps pinned to a directory provided in the path argument. Namely,
> > each map M in the object will be replaced by a map pinned to path/M.name.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anton Protopopov <a.s.protopopov@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h | 2 ++
> > tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.map | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 37 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> > index 4907997289e9..84c9e8f7bfd3 100644
> > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> > @@ -3144,6 +3144,40 @@ int bpf_object__unpin_maps(struct bpf_object *obj, const char *path)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +int bpf_object__reuse_maps(struct bpf_object *obj, const char *path)
> > +{
> > + struct bpf_map *map;
> > +
> > + if (!obj)
> > + return -ENOENT;
> > +
> > + if (!path)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + bpf_object__for_each_map(map, obj) {
> > + int len, err;
> > + int pinned_map_fd;
> > + char buf[PATH_MAX];
>
> We'd need to skip the case of bpf_map__is_internal(map) since they are always
> recreated for the given object.
>
> > + len = snprintf(buf, PATH_MAX, "%s/%s", path, bpf_map__name(map));
> > + if (len < 0) {
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + } else if (len >= PATH_MAX) {
> > + return -ENAMETOOLONG;
> > + }
> > +
> > + pinned_map_fd = bpf_obj_get(buf);
> > + if (pinned_map_fd < 0)
> > + return pinned_map_fd;
>
> Should we rather have a new map definition attribute that tells to reuse
> the map if it's pinned in bpf fs, and if not, we create it and later on
> pin it? This is what iproute2 is doing and which we're making use of heavily.
What do you think about adding a new generic field, say load_flags,
to the bpf_map_def structure and a particular flag, say LOAD_F_STICKY
for this purpose? And it will be cleared for internal maps, so we will skip
them as well.
> In bpf_object__reuse_maps() bailing out if bpf_obj_get() fails is perhaps
> too limiting for a generic API as new version of an object file may contain
> new maps which are not yet present in bpf fs at that point.
How permissive should it be? Is it ok to just print a warning on any
bpf_obj_get()
failure? Or does it make sense to skip some specific error (ENOENT) and reject
on other errors?
>
> > + err = bpf_map__reuse_fd(map, pinned_map_fd);
> > + if (err)
> > + return err;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > int bpf_object__pin_programs(struct bpf_object *obj, const char *path)
> > {
> > struct bpf_program *prog;
> > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
> > index d639f47e3110..7fe465a1be76 100644
> > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
> > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
> > @@ -82,6 +82,8 @@ int bpf_object__variable_offset(const struct bpf_object *obj, const char *name,
> > LIBBPF_API int bpf_object__pin_maps(struct bpf_object *obj, const char *path);
> > LIBBPF_API int bpf_object__unpin_maps(struct bpf_object *obj,
> > const char *path);
> > +LIBBPF_API int bpf_object__reuse_maps(struct bpf_object *obj,
> > + const char *path);
> > LIBBPF_API int bpf_object__pin_programs(struct bpf_object *obj,
> > const char *path);
> > LIBBPF_API int bpf_object__unpin_programs(struct bpf_object *obj,
> > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.map b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.map
> > index 2c6d835620d2..66a30be6696c 100644
> > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.map
> > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.map
> > @@ -172,5 +172,6 @@ LIBBPF_0.0.4 {
> > btf_dump__new;
> > btf__parse_elf;
> > bpf_object__load_xattr;
> > + bpf_object__reuse_maps;
> > libbpf_num_possible_cpus;
> > } LIBBPF_0.0.3;
> >
>
