On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 10:02 AM Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 6:23 AM Alexei Starovoitov > <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 09:12:09AM +0200, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > > > > > Also, I wonder if we should not have some way to namespace kfuncs. > > > Ideally, I would like to prevent the usage of those kfuncs outside of > > > some helpers that I define in HID so I don't have to worry too much > > > about other trace programs fuzzing and segfaulting the kernel. > > > > That would be a great feature to have. Other folks expressed the same interest. > > Just grouping them by prog type is not flexible enough. > > It feels kfuncs could be scoped by (prog_type, attach_btf_id or attach_hook) pair. > > What are your thoughts? > > > > Scoping by attach_btf_id is very appealing to me (attach_hook less TBH): > I have internal functions I do not want normal users to use, and also > it would also restrict who can call what in the more general case. > > However, I don't think I'll put that effort in v5. It is a nice to > have feature IMO, but not really required ATM. Great. Looking forward to it.
