On Sun, 5 Mar 2023 09:16:55 -0800 Stephen Hemminger <step...@networkplumber.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 21:56:54 +0800 > Martzki <mars14...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > The library libpcap has their function 'bpf_validate' either so > > there would be a multiple definition issue when linking with > > librte_bpf.a and libpcap.a staticly. > > > > You can reproduce this issue by 'meson build -Dprefer_static=true > > -Denable_apps=test-pmd -Denable_drivers=net/af_xdp,net/af_packet'. > > Notice you need to have a static version of libpcap to reproduce this. > > > > In 2019 there was a patch reported the same issue but not applied: > > https://inbox.dpdk.org/stable/2601191342ceee43887bde71ab9772580148a95...@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com/T > > > > Since 'bpf_validate' is an internal function, I think adding an 'rte' > > prefix is not a good idea and rename it to 'bpf_do_validate' instead. > > > > Signed-off-by: Martzki <mars14...@gmail.com> > > Let's change all the function names here to rte_bpf_XXX. Something like this diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf.c b/lib/bpf/bpf.c index 1e1dd42a589f..f218a8f2b049 100644 --- a/lib/bpf/bpf.c +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf.c @@ -31,14 +31,14 @@ rte_bpf_get_jit(const struct rte_bpf *bpf, struct rte_bpf_jit *jit) } int -bpf_jit(struct rte_bpf *bpf) +rte_bpf_jit(struct rte_bpf *bpf) { int32_t rc; #if defined(RTE_ARCH_X86_64) - rc = bpf_jit_x86(bpf); + rc = rte_bpf_jit_x86(bpf); #elif defined(RTE_ARCH_ARM64) - rc = bpf_jit_arm64(bpf); + rc = rte_bpf_jit_arm64(bpf); #else rc = -ENOTSUP; #endif diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_convert.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_convert.c index 9563274c9c6b..d441be66634f 100644 --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_convert.c +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_convert.c @@ -23,11 +23,8 @@ #include <rte_malloc.h> #include <rte_errno.h> -/* Workaround name conflicts with libpcap */ -#define bpf_validate(f, len) bpf_validate_libpcap(f, len) #include <pcap/pcap.h> #include <pcap/bpf.h> -#undef bpf_validate #include "bpf_impl.h" #include "bpf_def.h" diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_impl.h b/lib/bpf/bpf_impl.h index b4d8e87c6dfb..7fca2db9bef6 100644 --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_impl.h +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_impl.h @@ -17,12 +17,10 @@ struct rte_bpf { uint32_t stack_sz; }; -extern int bpf_validate(struct rte_bpf *bpf); - -extern int bpf_jit(struct rte_bpf *bpf); - -extern int bpf_jit_x86(struct rte_bpf *); -extern int bpf_jit_arm64(struct rte_bpf *); +extern int rte_bpf_validate(struct rte_bpf *bpf); +extern int rte_bpf_jit(struct rte_bpf *bpf); +extern int rte_bpf_jit_x86(struct rte_bpf *); +extern int rte_bpf_jit_arm64(struct rte_bpf *); extern int rte_bpf_logtype; diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c index c1a30e038660..182004ac7d6c 100644 --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c @@ -1490,7 +1490,7 @@ emit(struct bpf_jit_state *st, const struct rte_bpf *bpf) * produce a native ISA version of the given BPF code. */ int -bpf_jit_x86(struct rte_bpf *bpf) +rte_bpf_jit_x86(struct rte_bpf *bpf) { int32_t rc; uint32_t i; diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_load.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_load.c index 1e17df6ce0ab..2c4bca358603 100644 --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_load.c +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_load.c @@ -108,9 +108,9 @@ rte_bpf_load(const struct rte_bpf_prm *prm) return NULL; } - rc = bpf_validate(bpf); + rc = rte_bpf_validate(bpf); if (rc == 0) { - bpf_jit(bpf); + rte_bpf_jit(bpf); if (mprotect(bpf, bpf->sz, PROT_READ) != 0) rc = -ENOMEM; } diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c index 61cbb42216b8..2d3d899966b9 100644 --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c @@ -2302,7 +2302,7 @@ evaluate(struct bpf_verifier *bvf) } int -bpf_validate(struct rte_bpf *bpf) +rte_bpf_validate(struct rte_bpf *bpf) { int32_t rc; struct bpf_verifier bvf;
