> On Aug 30, 2019, at 11:53 AM, Anton Protopopov <a.s.protopopov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> чт, 29 авг. 2019 г. в 16:02, Song Liu <songliubraving@xxxxxx>:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 14, 2019, at 5:03 PM, Anton Protopopov <a.s.protopopov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> int bpf_object__unload(struct bpf_object *obj)
>>> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
>>> index e8f70977d137..634f278578dd 100644
>>> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
>>> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
>>> @@ -63,8 +63,13 @@ LIBBPF_API libbpf_print_fn_t libbpf_set_print(libbpf_print_fn_t fn);
>>> struct bpf_object;
>>>
>>> struct bpf_object_open_attr {
>>> - const char *file;
>>> + union {
>>> + const char *file;
>>> + const char *obj_name;
>>> + };
>>> enum bpf_prog_type prog_type;
>>> + void *obj_buf;
>>> + size_t obj_buf_sz;
>>> };
>>
>> I think this would break dynamically linked libbpf. No?
>
> Ah, yes, sure. What is the right way to make changes which break ABI in libbpf?
I don't have a good idea here on the top of my head.
Maybe we need a new struct and/or function for this.
>
> BTW, does the commit ddc7c3042614 ("libbpf: implement BPF CO-RE offset
> relocation algorithm") which adds a new field to the struct
> bpf_object_load_attr also break ABI?
I think this change was in the same release, so it is OK.
Thanks,
Song
