On 2021-02-16 03:01, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 08:35:29PM +0100, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
[...]
I'd say it's depending on the libbpf 1.0/libxdp merge timeframe. If
we're months ahead, then I'd really like to see this in libbpf until the
merge. However, I'll leave that for Magnus/you to decide!
WDYM by libbpf 1.0/libxdp merge? I glanced through thread and I saw that
John was also not aware of that. Not sure where it was discussed?
Oh, right. Yeah, we've had some offlist discussions about moving the
AF_XDP functionality from libbpf to libxdp in the libbpf 1.0 timeframe.
If you're saying 'merge', then is libxdp going to be a part of kernel or
as an AF-XDP related guy I would be forced to include yet another
repository in the BPF developer toolchain? :<
The AF_XDP functionality of libbpf will be part of libxdp, which is not
in the kernel tree. libxdp depend on libbpf, which includes the core BPF
functionality. For AF_XDP this is a good thing IMO. libxdp includes more
higher lever abstractions than libbpf, which is more aligned to AF_XDP.
Yes, that would mean that you would get another dependency for AF_XDP,
and one that is not in the kernel tree. For most *users* this is not a
problem, in fact it might be easier to consume and to contribute for
most users. We can't optimize just for the kernel hackers. ;-)
Björn
[...]
