On 8/25/23 2:13 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 12:54 PM Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Add __percpu_kptr macro definition in bpf_helpers.h. Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@xxxxxxxxx> --- tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h index bbab9ad9dc5a..77ceea575dc7 100644 --- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h @@ -181,6 +181,7 @@ enum libbpf_tristate { #define __ksym __attribute__((section(".ksyms"))) #define __kptr_untrusted __attribute__((btf_type_tag("kptr_untrusted"))) #define __kptr __attribute__((btf_type_tag("kptr"))) +#define __percpu_kptr __attribute__((btf_type_tag("percpu_kptr")))total nitpick, but given kptr_untrusted, should this stick to the pattern and be __kptr_percpu? It keeps this "kptr" umbrella/namespace consistent
Alexei mentioned that __kptr_untrusted might be deprecated in the future. I am using __percpu_kptr just feel it is more nature to user e.g., we use 'percpu ptr' for kernel percpu ptr. But I can change the name if there is a consensus among community.
#define bpf_ksym_exists(sym) ({ \ _Static_assert(!__builtin_constant_p(!!sym), #sym " should be marked as __weak"); \ -- 2.34.1
