> On Nov 7, 2019, at 3:07 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 10:51:41PM +0000, Song Liu wrote: >> >> >>> On Nov 6, 2019, at 9:46 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> Teach libbpf to recognize tracing programs types and attach them to >>> fentry/fexit. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@xxxxxx> >> >> With nit below: >> >>> --- >>> tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 2 ++ >>> tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- >>> tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h | 5 +++ >>> tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.map | 2 ++ >>> 4 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >>> >> >> [...] >> >>> >>> /* Accessors of bpf_program */ >>> struct bpf_program; >>> @@ -248,6 +251,8 @@ LIBBPF_API struct bpf_link * >>> bpf_program__attach_raw_tracepoint(struct bpf_program *prog, >>> const char *tp_name); >>> >>> +LIBBPF_API struct bpf_link * >>> +bpf_program__attach_trace(struct bpf_program *prog); >>> struct bpf_insn; >> >> attach_trace is not very clear. I guess we cannot call it >> attach_ftrace? Maybe we call it attach_fentry and attach_fexit >> (two names pointing to same function)? > > bpf_program__attach_trace() can attach all BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING. > Which today are: > BPF_TRACE_RAW_TP, > BPF_TRACE_FENTRY, > BPF_TRACE_FEXIT, > There will be more BPF_TRACE_* enum bpf_attach_type in the future. > I considered naming it bpf_program__attach_tracing(), but it's uglier > and longer. I see. Thanks for the explanation. Song
