On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 7:07 PM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 04:29:49PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > This patch exposes two new APIs btf__get_raw_data_size() and
> > btf__get_raw_data() that allows to get a copy of raw BTF data out of
> > struct btf. This is useful for external programs that need to manipulate
> > raw data, e.g., pahole using btf__dedup() to deduplicate BTF type info
> > and then writing it back to file.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andr...@fb.com>
> > Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubrav...@fb.com>
> > ---
> > tools/lib/bpf/btf.c | 10 ++++++++++
> > tools/lib/bpf/btf.h | 2 ++
> > tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.map | 2 ++
> > 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/btf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/btf.c
> > index 1c2ba7182400..34bfb3641aac 100644
> > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/btf.c
> > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/btf.c
> > @@ -437,6 +437,16 @@ int btf__fd(const struct btf *btf)
> > return btf->fd;
> > }
> >
> > +__u32 btf__get_raw_data_size(const struct btf *btf)
> > +{
> > + return btf->data_size;
> > +}
> > +
> > +void btf__get_raw_data(const struct btf *btf, char *data)
> > +{
> > + memcpy(data, btf->data, btf->data_size);
> > +}
>
> I cannot think of any other way to use this api,
> but to call btf__get_raw_data_size() first,
> then malloc that much memory and then call btf__get_raw_data()
> to store btf into it.
>
> If so, may be api should be single call that allocates, copies,
> and returns pointer to new mem and its size?
> Probably less error prone?
>
I don't have strong preference, but providing pointer to allocated memory
seems more flexible and allows more clever/optimal use of memory from caller
side. E.g., instead of doing two mallocs, you can imagine doing something
like:
int max_size = max(btf__get_raw_data_size(btf),
btf_ext__get_raw_data_size(btf_ext));
char *m = malloc(max_size);
btf__get_raw_data(btf, m);
dump_btf_section_to_file(m, some_file);
btf_ext__get_raw_data(btf_ext, m);
dump_btf_ext_section_to_file(m, some_file);
free(m);
Also, pointer to memory could be mmap()'ed file, for instance. In general,
for a library it might be a good thing to not be prescriptive as to how one
gets that piece of memory.
If those examples are not convincing enough, I'm happy to go with single
btf__get_raw_data() call doing allocation and returning pointer.
