On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:59:53AM -0700, Daniel Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:14:13AM +0100, Lorenz Bauer wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 6, 2024 at 7:25 PM Daniel Xu <dxu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > This macro pair is functionally equivalent to BTF_SET8_START/END, except
> > > with BTF_SET8_KFUNCS flag set in the btf_id_set8 flags field. The next
> > > commit will codemod all kfunc set8s to this new variant such that all
> > > kfuncs are tagged as such in .BTF_ids section.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > include/linux/btf_ids.h | 11 +++++++++++
> > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/btf_ids.h b/include/linux/btf_ids.h
> > > index dca09b7f21dc..0fe4f1cd1918 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/btf_ids.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/btf_ids.h
> > > @@ -8,6 +8,9 @@ struct btf_id_set {
> > > u32 ids[];
> > > };
> > >
> > > +/* This flag implies BTF_SET8 holds kfunc(s) */
> > > +#define BTF_SET8_KFUNCS (1 << 0)
> >
> > Nit: could this be an enum so that the flag is discoverable via BTF?
>
> Sure, makes sense.
I took a look - don't think we can make it an enum. See
include/linux/btf.h:
/* These need to be macros, as the expressions are used in assembler input */
#define KF_ACQUIRE (1 << 0) /* kfunc is an acquire function */
#define KF_RELEASE (1 << 1) /* kfunc is a release function */
[..]
Could do some redefines but maybe not worth it. The new flag is a pretty
deep impl detail anyways.
Thanks,
Daniel
