On 7/5/22 9:19 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 6:55 AM Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:static inline int kallsyms_for_perf(void) { #ifdef CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS @@ -885,6 +967,18 @@ const char *kdb_walk_kallsyms(loff_t *pos) static int __init kallsyms_init(void) { proc_create("kallsyms", 0444, NULL, &kallsyms_proc_ops); +#if defined(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL) + { + int ret; + + ksym_iter_reg_info.ctx_arg_info[0].btf_id = *btf_ksym_iter_id; + ret = bpf_iter_reg_target(&ksym_iter_reg_info); + if (ret) { + pr_warn("Warning: could not register bpf ksym iterator: %d\n", ret); + return ret; + } + } +#endifThe ifdef-s inside the function body are not pretty. I feel the v2 version was cleaner. static void __init bpf_ksym_iter_register() were only missing late_initcall(bpf_ksym_iter_register); to make it single #ifdef CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL for everything. wdyt?
Okay, a separate function is good too. Also agree with Alexei that a separate init call bpf_ksym_iter_register() is needed since we need late_initcall(...) instead of device_initcall(...) to be consistent with other bpf_iter's.
