2020-06-15 11:04 UTC+0200 ~ Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <t...@redhat.com> > Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <a...@kernel.org> writes: > >> Em Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 10:57:59PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko escreveu: >>> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 8:45 PM Alexei Starovoitov >>> <alexei.starovoi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:31:50PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: >>>>> Add bpf_iter-based way to find all the processes that hold open FDs >>>>> against >>>>> BPF object (map, prog, link, btf). Add new flag (-o, for "ownership", >>>>> given >>>>> -p is already taken) to trigger collection and output of these PIDs. >>>>> >>>>> Sample output for each of 4 BPF objects: >>>>> >>>>> $ sudo ./bpftool -o prog show >>>>> 1992: cgroup_skb name egress_alt tag 9ad187367cf2b9e8 gpl >>>>> loaded_at 2020-06-12T14:18:10-0700 uid 0 >>>>> xlated 48B jited 59B memlock 4096B map_ids 2074 >>>>> btf_id 460 >>>>> pids: 913709,913732,913733,913734 >>>>> 2062: cgroup_device tag 8c42dee26e8cd4c2 gpl >>>>> loaded_at 2020-06-12T14:37:52-0700 uid 0 >>>>> xlated 648B jited 409B memlock 4096B >>>>> pids: 1 >>>>> >>>>> $ sudo ./bpftool -o map show >>>>> 2074: array name test_cgr.bss flags 0x400 >>>>> key 4B value 8B max_entries 1 memlock 8192B >>>>> btf_id 460 >>>>> pids: 913709,913732,913733,913734 >>>>> >>>>> $ sudo ./bpftool -o link show >>>>> 82: cgroup prog 1992 >>>>> cgroup_id 0 attach_type egress >>>>> pids: 913709,913732,913733,913734 >>>>> 86: cgroup prog 1992 >>>>> cgroup_id 0 attach_type egress >>>>> pids: 913709,913732,913733,913734 >>>> >>>> This is awesome. >> >> Indeed. >> >>> Thanks. >>> >>>> >>>> Why extra flag though? I think it's so useful that everyone would want to >>>> see >> >> Agreed. >> >>> No good reason apart from "being safe by default". If turned on by >>> default, bpftool would need to probe for bpf_iter support first. I can >>> add probing and do this by default. >> >> I think this is the way to go. > > +1 > > And also +1 on the awesomeness of this feature! :) > > -Toke >
Thanks a lot Andrii, the feature looks great indeed. Thank you for the clean-up and refactoring in bpftool and its Makefile as well, I am happy to confirm that test_bpftool_build.sh still passes on my setup with your changes. Quentin
