Hi,
On 8/28/2023 3:55 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> Count runtime stats for bf programs executed through bpf_prog_run_array
> function. That covers kprobe, perf event and trace syscall probe.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/linux/bpf.h | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
> index 478fdc4794c9..732253eea675 100644
> --- a/include/linux/bpf.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
> @@ -2715,10 +2715,11 @@ bpf_prog_run_array(const struct bpf_prog_array *array,
> const void *ctx, bpf_prog_run_fn run_prog)
> {
> const struct bpf_prog_array_item *item;
> - const struct bpf_prog *prog;
> + struct bpf_prog *prog;
> struct bpf_run_ctx *old_run_ctx;
> struct bpf_trace_run_ctx run_ctx;
> u32 ret = 1;
> + u64 start;
>
> RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(!rcu_read_lock_held(), "no rcu lock held");
>
> @@ -2732,7 +2733,9 @@ bpf_prog_run_array(const struct bpf_prog_array *array,
> item = &array->items[0];
> while ((prog = READ_ONCE(item->prog))) {
> run_ctx.bpf_cookie = item->bpf_cookie;
> + start = bpf_prog_start_time();
> ret &= run_prog(prog, ctx);
> + bpf_prog_update_prog_stats(prog, start);
> item++;
> }
bpf_prog_run() has already accounted the running count and the consumed
time for the prog, so I think both previous patch and this patch are not
needed.
> bpf_reset_run_ctx(old_run_ctx);
