On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 10:16:35PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Fri, 23 Oct 2020 11:38:50 +0800 > Hangbin Liu <haliu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > This series converts iproute2 to use libbpf for loading and attaching > > BPF programs when it is available. This means that iproute2 will > > correctly process BTF information and support the new-style BTF-defined > > maps, while keeping compatibility with the old internal map definition > > syntax. > > > > This is achieved by checking for libbpf at './configure' time, and using > > it if available. By default the system libbpf will be used, but static > > linking against a custom libbpf version can be achieved by passing > > LIBBPF_DIR to configure. FORCE_LIBBPF can be set to force configure to > > abort if no suitable libbpf is found (useful for automatic packaging > > that wants to enforce the dependency). > > > > The old iproute2 bpf code is kept and will be used if no suitable libbpf > > is available. When using libbpf, wrapper code ensures that iproute2 will > > still understand the old map definition format, including populating > > map-in-map and tail call maps before load. > > > > The examples in bpf/examples are kept, and a separate set of examples > > are added with BTF-based map definitions for those examples where this > > is possible (libbpf doesn't currently support declaratively populating > > tail call maps). > > > Luca wants to put this in Debian 11 (good idea), but that means: > > 1. It has to work with 5.10 release and kernel. > 2. Someone has to test it. > 3. The 5.10 is a LTS kernel release which means BPF developers have > to agree to supporting LTS releases. Why would the bpf developers have to support any old releases? That's not their responsibility, that's the developers who want to create stable/lts releases. > If someone steps up to doing this then I would be happy to merge it now > for 5.10. Otherwise it won't show up until 5.11. Don't ever "rush" anything for a LTS/stable release, otherwise I am going to have to go back to the old way of not announcing them until _after_ they are released as people throw stuff that is not ready for a normal merge. This looks like a new feature, and shouldn't go in right now in the development cycle anyway, all features for 5.10 had to be in linux-next before 5.9 was released. thanks, greg k-h
