On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 5:37 PM Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 12/11/23 8:06 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 8:01 PM Andrii Nakryiko > > <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> > >>> While I can preemptively answer that in the case vmlinux BTF > >>> is not available it's fine not to parse names and rely on hex. > >> > >> It's fine, I can do optional BTF-based parsing, if that's what you prefer. > > > > I prefer to keep uapi/bpf.h as-is and use BTF. > > But I'd like to hear what Daniel's and Martin's preferences are. > > I think user will find it useful to have a more readable uapi header file. It I'd say having numeric values make it more readable, but that's a separate discussion. I purposefully kept full BPF_-prefixed names intact for readability, as opposed to what we do for enum bpf_func_id. > would be nice to keep the current uapi/bpf.h form if there is another solution. Ok, I'll use BTF, no problem.
