On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 11:58:54AM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 11:49 AM Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > In QEMU there's a desire to make use of BPF programs for implementing > > some networking features. The current patches are proposing adding > > prebuilt BPF byte code to the QEMU repo, with source available, but > > not actually building from source during a build. > > > > I was wondering if we had any specific guidance or rules covering the > > shipping BPF programs in particular ? > > > > To me it feels like BPF programs should fall under normal Fedora > > practice that expects everything to be built from master source. > > > > We do have the exception that allows firmware to be shipped as > > pre-built blobs, but I'm thinking that BPF programs could not > > be considered as firmware. > > > > Has this been discussed before, if so can someone point to the > > results, as I'm not finding anything specific to BPF programs and > > Fedora packaging via Google. > > If there are no specialized Packaging Guidelines for something, then > the general guidelines apply - so in this case, compiling from source > is required, since Fedora packages MUST NOT ship precompiled binaries. It seems this case is a little more fuzzy in terms of what is considered "the preferred source" format, and whether the BPF program is in fact considered a "binary" at all. There is the "dpdk" package in Fedora which is doing similar to what is being proposed for QEMU. In dpdk-stable-19.11.3/drivers/net/tap/tap_bpf_program.c there is BPF "source code". This was, at some point in time, apparently compiled using some undefined process to create a binary byte code blob. This binary blob was then processed, again by some undefined process, to extract just the BPF instructions, which are then turned back into "source code" as a static byte array in a C header file. The latter is what is actually compiled. This derived source is in the dpdk-stable-19.11.3/drivers/net/tap/tap_bpf_insns.h Given that dpdk is not providing any build process for going from tap_bpf_program.c to tap_bpf_insns.h, it looks to me like the upstream project effectively considers "tap_bpf_insns.h" to be their preferred source form, and tap_bpf_program.c as just a reference for its original creation. IOW, to me it looks like this embedded BPF program shouldn't be considered a binary from Fedora POV and can be used as is. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
