On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 9:29 AM Quentin Monnet <quentin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > To work with the different program types, map types, attach types etc. > supported by eBPF, bpftool needs occasional updates to learn about the new > features supported by the kernel. When such types translate into new > keyword for the command line, updates are expected in several locations: > typically, the help message displayed from bpftool itself, the manual page, > and the bash completion file should be updated. The options used by the > different commands for bpftool should also remain synchronised at those > locations. > > Several omissions have occurred in the past, and a number of types are > still missing today. This set is an attempt to improve the situation. It > brings up-to-date the lists of types or options in bpftool, and also adds a > Python script to the BPF selftests to automatically check that most of > these lists remain synchronised. > > Quentin Monnet (7): > tools: bpftool: slightly ease bash completion updates > selftests/bpf: check consistency between bpftool source, doc, > completion > tools: bpftool: complete and synchronise attach or map types > tools: bpftool: update and synchronise option list in doc and help msg > selftests/bpf: update bpftool's consistency script for checking > options > tools: bpftool: document and add bash completion for -L, -B options > tools: bpftool: complete metrics list in "bpftool prog profile" doc > > .../bpf/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-btf.rst | 48 +- > .../bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-cgroup.rst | 3 +- > .../bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-feature.rst | 2 +- > .../bpf/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-gen.rst | 9 +- > .../bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-iter.rst | 2 + > .../bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-link.rst | 3 +- > .../bpf/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-map.rst | 3 +- > .../bpf/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-net.rst | 2 +- > .../bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-perf.rst | 2 +- > .../bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-prog.rst | 36 +- > .../Documentation/bpftool-struct_ops.rst | 2 +- > tools/bpf/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool.rst | 12 +- > tools/bpf/bpftool/bash-completion/bpftool | 69 ++- > tools/bpf/bpftool/btf.c | 3 +- > tools/bpf/bpftool/cgroup.c | 3 +- > tools/bpf/bpftool/common.c | 76 +-- > tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c | 1 + > tools/bpf/bpftool/gen.c | 3 +- > tools/bpf/bpftool/iter.c | 2 + > tools/bpf/bpftool/link.c | 3 +- > tools/bpf/bpftool/main.c | 3 +- > tools/bpf/bpftool/main.h | 3 +- > tools/bpf/bpftool/map.c | 5 +- > tools/bpf/bpftool/net.c | 1 + > tools/bpf/bpftool/perf.c | 5 +- > tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c | 8 +- > tools/bpf/bpftool/struct_ops.c | 2 +- > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile | 1 + > .../selftests/bpf/test_bpftool_synctypes.py | 586 ++++++++++++++++++ > 29 files changed, 802 insertions(+), 96 deletions(-) > create mode 100755 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_bpftool_synctypes.py > > -- > 2.30.2 > The patch set name ends abruptly at "synchronise and "... And what? I need to know :) Overall, it looks good, though I can't speak Python much, so I trust the script works and we'll fix whatever is necessary as we go. I had one small real nit about not re-formatting tons of existing lines for no good reason, let's keep Git blame a bit more useful. Also, it doesn't seem like you are actually calling a new script from selftests/bpf/Makefile, right? That's good, because otherwise any UAPI change in kernel header would require bpftool changes in the same patch. But once this lands, we should probably run this in kernel-patches CI ([0]) and, maybe, not sure, libbpf CI ([1]) as well. So please follow up with that as well afterwards, that way you won't be the only one nagging people about missed doc updates. [0] https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/tree/master/travis-ci/vmtest [1] https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf/tree/master/travis-ci/vmtest
