Em Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 12:35:05PM +0000, Wang Nan escreveu:
> This patch collects all programs in an object file into an array of
> 'struct bpf_program' for further processing. That structure is for
> representing each eBPF program. 'bpf_prog' should be a better name, but
> it has been used by linux/filter.h. Although it is a kernel space name,
> I still prefer to call it 'bpf_program' to prevent possible confusion.
>
> bpf_program__new() creates a new 'struct bpf_program' object. It first
> init a variable in stack using __bpf_program__new(), then if success,
> enlarges obj->programs array and copy the new object in.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Nan <wangn...@huawei.com>
> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <a...@plumgrid.com>
> Cc: Brendan Gregg <brendan.d.gr...@gmail.com>
> Cc: Daniel Borkmann <dan...@iogearbox.net>
> Cc: David Ahern <dsah...@gmail.com>
> Cc: He Kuang <heku...@huawei.com>
> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jo...@kernel.org>
> Cc: Kaixu Xia <xiaka...@huawei.com>
> Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu...@hitachi.com>
> Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhy...@kernel.org>
> Cc: Paul Mackerras <pau...@samba.org>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijls...@chello.nl>
> Cc: Zefan Li <lize...@huawei.com>
> Cc: pi3or...@163.com
> Link:
> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1435716878-189507-13-git-send-email-wangn...@huawei.com
> Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <a...@redhat.com>
> ---
> tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 117
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 117 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> index 9b016c0..3b717de 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> @@ -78,12 +78,27 @@ void libbpf_set_print(libbpf_print_fn_t warn,
> # define LIBBPF_ELF_C_READ_MMAP ELF_C_READ
> #endif
>
> +/*
> + * bpf_prog should be a better name but it has been used in
> + * linux/filter.h.
> + */
> +struct bpf_program {
> + /* Index in elf obj file, for relocation use. */
> + int idx;
> + char *section_name;
> + struct bpf_insn *insns;
> + size_t insns_cnt;
> +};
> +
> struct bpf_object {
> char license[64];
> u32 kern_version;
> void *maps_buf;
> size_t maps_buf_sz;
>
> + struct bpf_program *programs;
> + size_t nr_programs;
> +
> /*
> * Information when doing elf related work. Only valid if fd
> * is valid.
> @@ -100,6 +115,84 @@ struct bpf_object {
> };
> #define obj_elf_valid(o) ((o)->efile.elf)
>
> +static void bpf_program__clear(struct bpf_program *prog)
> +{
> + if (!prog)
> + return;
> +
> + zfree(&prog->section_name);
> + zfree(&prog->insns);
> + prog->insns_cnt = 0;
> + prog->idx = -1;
> +}
So in perf land we use 'bpf_program__exit()' as the counterpart of
bpf_program__init(), i.e. one just initializes fields, allocating
memory for 'struct bpf_program' members, but does not allocates the
struct bpf_program itself, because sometimes we embed it inside other
structs, or we have it in arrays, as you do.
So, to keep that convention, please rename bpf_program__clear() to
bpf_program__exit() and the next function, __bpf_program__new() to
bpf_program__init(), with 'struct bpf_program *prog' as the first
parameter.
To speed things up, from now on, when I see such stuff, I will do the
changes, put them in a branch with a commiter note, and wait for your
Ack (or not, if you disagree with something).
One more comment below.
> +
> +static int
> +__bpf_program__new(void *data, size_t size, char *name, int idx,
> + struct bpf_program *prog)
> +{
> + if (size < sizeof(struct bpf_insn)) {
> + pr_warning("corrupted section '%s'\n", name);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + bzero(prog, sizeof(*prog));
> +
> + prog->section_name = strdup(name);
> + if (!prog->section_name) {
> + pr_warning("failed to alloc name for prog %s\n",
> + name);
> + goto errout;
> + }
> +
> + prog->insns = malloc(size);
> + if (!prog->insns) {
> + pr_warning("failed to alloc insns for %s\n", name);
> + goto errout;
> + }
> + prog->insns_cnt = size / sizeof(struct bpf_insn);
> + memcpy(prog->insns, data,
> + prog->insns_cnt * sizeof(struct bpf_insn));
> + prog->idx = idx;
> +
> + return 0;
> +errout:
> + bpf_program__clear(prog);
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +}
> +
> +static struct bpf_program *
> +bpf_program__new(struct bpf_object *obj, void *data, size_t size,
> + char *name, int idx)
This, as well, is not a 'bpf_program' method, it is a 'struct
bpf_object' one, that will manipulate 'struct bpf_object' internal
state, changing its struct members to get space for an extra bpf_program
that was initialized on the stack, if the initialization of such
bpf_program went well, or bail out otherwise.
So I suggest you rename this to:
int bpf_object__add_program(struct bpf_object *obj, void *data, size_t size,
char *name, int idx)
And probably move that debug that uses prog->section_name to just after
the realloc, here in this function.
I will look at the other patches after lunch, thanks for providing the
git tree, I will try and use it before looking at the patches
individually, to get a feel of the whole thing.
Ah, I also noticed that you provided way more comments in other patches,
that really helps, keep it up!
Thanks,
- Arnaldo
> +{
> + struct bpf_program prog, *progs;
> + int nr_progs, err;
> +
> + err = __bpf_program__new(data, size, name, idx, &prog);
> + if (err)
> + return NULL;
> +
> + progs = obj->programs;
> + nr_progs = obj->nr_programs;
> +
> + progs = realloc(progs, sizeof(progs[0]) * (nr_progs + 1));
> + if (!progs) {
> + /*
> + * In this case the original obj->programs
> + * is still valid, so don't need special treat for
> + * bpf_close_object().
> + */
> + pr_warning("failed to alloc a new program '%s'\n",
> + name);
> + bpf_program__clear(&prog);
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
> + obj->programs = progs;
> + obj->nr_programs = nr_progs + 1;
> + progs[nr_progs] = prog;
> + return &progs[nr_progs];
> +}
> +
> static struct bpf_object *bpf_object__new(const char *path,
> void *obj_buf,
> size_t obj_buf_sz)
> @@ -342,6 +435,21 @@ static int bpf_object__elf_collect(struct bpf_object
> *obj)
> err = -EEXIST;
> } else
> obj->efile.symbols = data;
> + } else if ((sh.sh_type == SHT_PROGBITS) &&
> + (sh.sh_flags & SHF_EXECINSTR) &&
> + (data->d_size > 0)) {
> + struct bpf_program *prog;
> +
> + prog = bpf_program__new(obj, data->d_buf,
> + data->d_size, name,
> + idx);
> + if (!prog) {
> + pr_warning("failed to alloc program %s (%s)",
> + name, obj->path);
> + err = -ENOMEM;
> + } else
> + pr_debug("found program %s\n",
> + prog->section_name);
> }
> if (err)
> goto out;
> @@ -415,11 +523,20 @@ struct bpf_object *bpf_object__open_buffer(void
> *obj_buf,
>
> void bpf_object__close(struct bpf_object *obj)
> {
> + size_t i;
> +
> if (!obj)
> return;
>
> bpf_object__elf_finish(obj);
>
> zfree(&obj->maps_buf);
> +
> + if (obj->programs && obj->nr_programs) {
> + for (i = 0; i < obj->nr_programs; i++)
> + bpf_program__clear(&obj->programs[i]);
> + }
> + zfree(&obj->programs);
> +
> free(obj);
> }
> --
> 1.8.3.4
--
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/
