On 7/30/19 7:21 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > >>>> If bpftool was taught to do equivalent of 'ip link' that would be >>>> very different story and I would be opposed to that. >>> Yes, that'd be pretty clear cut, only the XDP stuff is a bit more >>> of a judgement call. >> bpftool must be able to introspect every aspect of bpf programming. >> That includes detaching and attaching anywhere. >> Anyone doing 'bpftool p s' should be able to switch off particular >> prog id without learning ten different other tools. > I think the fact that we already have an implementation in iproute2, > which is at the risk of bit rot is more important to me that the > hypothetical scenario where everyone knows to just use bpftool (for > XDP, for TC it's still iproute2 unless there's someone crazy enough > to reimplement the TC functionality :))
apparently the iproute2 version has bit rot which is a shame. > > I'm not sure we can settle our differences over email :) > I have tremendous respect for all the maintainers I CCed here, > if nobody steps up to agree with me I'll concede the bpftool net > battle entirely :) bpftool started as an introspection tool and has turned into a one stop shop for all things ebpf. I am mixed on whether that is a good thing or a bad thing.
