On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 2:19 PM Song Liu <songliubraving@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Sep 30, 2019, at 11:58 AM, Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Make bpf_helpers.h and bpf_endian.h official part of libbpf. Ensure they > > are installed along the other libbpf headers. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@xxxxxx> > > --- > > tools/lib/bpf/Makefile | 4 +- > > tools/lib/bpf/bpf_endian.h | 72 +++++ > > tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h | 527 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 3 files changed, 602 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > create mode 100644 tools/lib/bpf/bpf_endian.h > > create mode 100644 tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h > > [...] > > +#endif /* __BPF_ENDIAN__ */ > > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..a1d9b97b8e15 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h > > @@ -0,0 +1,527 @@ > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (LGPL-2.1 OR BSD-2-Clause) */ > > +#ifndef __BPF_HELPERS__ > > +#define __BPF_HELPERS__ > > + > > +#define __uint(name, val) int (*name)[val] > > +#define __type(name, val) val *name > > Similar to the concern with 4/6, maybe we should rename/prefix/postfix > these two macros? Those were specifically named so they are as clear and clean in user code as possible, it was an explicit goal. Ideally they would be "uint" and "type", but that's pushing it too far :) > > Thanks, > Song >
