On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 10:22:15AM +0100, Björn Töpel wrote:
> On 2021-02-15 21:24, John Fastabend wrote:
> > Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> > > With the introduction of bpf_link in xsk's libbpf part, there's no
> > > further need for explicit unload of prog on xdpsock's termination. When
> > > proces
On 2021-02-15 21:24, John Fastabend wrote:
Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
With the introduction of bpf_link in xsk's libbpf part, there's no
further need for explicit unload of prog on xdpsock's termination. When
process dies, the bpf_link's refcount will be decremented and resources
will be unloaded
Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> With the introduction of bpf_link in xsk's libbpf part, there's no
> further need for explicit unload of prog on xdpsock's termination. When
> process dies, the bpf_link's refcount will be decremented and resources
> will be unloaded/freed under the hood in case when the
With the introduction of bpf_link in xsk's libbpf part, there's no
further need for explicit unload of prog on xdpsock's termination. When
process dies, the bpf_link's refcount will be decremented and resources
will be unloaded/freed under the hood in case when there are no more
active users.
Whil
