On 10/5/20 10:36 AM, Maciej Żenczykowski wrote:
>> Don't bother. This helper is no go.
>
> I disagree on the 'no go' -- I do think we should have this helper.
+1
>
> Lets not make bpf even harder to use then it already is...
>
Logging is done using time of day; that is not a posix mistake but
On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 2:52 PM Pujari, Bimmy wrote:
>
> Thanks everyone for putting your valuable time to review these patches. Can
> any one from you suggest the best way to test this function in selftest?
Don't bother. This helper is no go.
Please trim your replies next time and do not top po
...@vger.kernel.org; netdev@vger.kernel.org; mche...@kernel.org;
a...@kernel.org; dan...@iogearbox.net; ka...@fb.com; m...@google.com;
Nikravesh, Ashkan ; Alvarez, Daniel A
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v7 2/2] selftests/bpf: Selftest for real time
helper
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 07:05:04PM -0700
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 07:05:04PM -0700, bimmy.puj...@intel.com wrote:
> +SEC("realtime_helper")
> +int realtime_helper_test(struct __sk_buff *skb)
> +{
> + unsigned long long *lasttime;
> + unsigned long long curtime;
> + int key = 0;
> + int err = 0;
> +
> + lasttime = bpf_ma
From: Bimmy Pujari
Add test validating that bpf_ktime_get_real_ns works fine.
Signed-off-by: Bimmy Pujari
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ktime_real.c | 42 +++
.../bpf/progs/test_ktime_get_real_ns.c| 36
2 files changed, 78 insertions(+)
create m
