On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 11:27:36AM +0800, Wangnan (F) wrote: > > > On 2015/12/12 2:21, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > >On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 08:39:35PM +0800, pi3orama wrote: > >>>static u64 (*bpf_ktime_get_ns)(void) = > >>> (void *)5; > >>>static int (*bpf_trace_printk)(const char *fmt, int fmt_size, ...) = > >>> (void *)6; > >>>static int (*bpf_get_smp_processor_id)(void) = > >>> (void *)8; > >>>static int (*bpf_perf_event_output)(void *, struct bpf_map_def *, int, > >>>void *, unsigned long) = > >>> (void *)23; > >>> > >>>Where can I get this magical mistery table? Could this be hidden away in > >>>some .h file automagically included in bpf scriptlets so that n00bies > >>>like me don't have to be wtf'ing? > >>> > >>They are function numbers defined in bpf.h and bpf-common.h, but they are > >>Linux > >>headers. Directly include them causes many error for llvm. Also, the > >>function > >>prototypes are BPF specific and can't included in Linux source. We should > >>have > >>a place holds those indices and prototypes together. > >wait, what kind of errors? > >they are in uapi, so gets installed into /usr/include eventually > >and I haven't seen any erros either with gcc or clang. > > > Sorry. I saw error because I use > > #include <linux/bpf.h> > > It is okay if I use > > #include <uapi/linux/bpf.h>
then let's use that instead of copy-paste. thanks -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
