On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 9:05 AM Quentin Monnet <quentin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 2022-03-31 11:45 UTC-0400 ~ Milan Landaverde <milan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Previously [1], we were using bpf_probe_prog_type which returned a > > bool, but the new libbpf_probe_bpf_prog_type can return a negative > > error code on failure. This change decides for bpftool to declare > > a program type is not available on probe failure. > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220202225916.3313522-3-andrii@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > Signed-off-by: Milan Landaverde <milan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c > > index c2f43a5d38e0..b2fbaa7a6b15 100644 > > --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c > > +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c > > @@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ probe_prog_type(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, bool *supported_types, > > > > res = probe_prog_type_ifindex(prog_type, ifindex); > > } else { > > - res = libbpf_probe_bpf_prog_type(prog_type, NULL); > > + res = libbpf_probe_bpf_prog_type(prog_type, NULL) > 0; > > } > > > > #ifdef USE_LIBCAP > A completely unrelated question to you, Quentin. How hard is bpftool's dependency on libcap? We've recently removed libcap from selftests, I wonder if it would be possible to do that for bpftool as well to reduce amount of shared libraries bpftool depends on. > Reviewed-by: Quentin Monnet <quentin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Thanks!
