On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 2:42 AM Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 5/17/23 2:01 AM, Lorenz Bauer wrote: > > On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 7:26 AM Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I can see your point to refactor it to make it work for all different BTF_KIND. > > Other than BTF_KIND_DATASEC, env->resolve_mode stays the same for all other > kinds once it is decided. It is why resolve_mode is in the "env" instead of "v". > My concern is this will hide some bugs (existing or future) that accidentally > changed the resolve_mode in the middle. If there is another legit case that > could be found other than BTF_KIND_DATASEC, that will be a better time to do > this refactoring with a proper test case considering most bpf progs need btf to > load nowadays and probably need to veristat test also. If it came to that, might > as well consider moving resolve_mode from "env" to "v". > > btf_datasec_resolve() is acting as a very top level resolver like btf_resolve(), > so it reset env->resolve_mode before resolving its var member like how > btf_resolve() does. imo, together with env->resolve_mode stays the same for > others, it is more straight forward to reason. I understand that it is personal > preference and could argue either way. Okay, let's drop it then :)
