> >>>>
> >>>> On 6/24/22 13:23, Ciara Loftus wrote:
> >>>>> libbpf v0.8.0 deprecates the bpf_get_link_xdp_id and
> >> bpf_set_link_xdp_fd
> >>>>> functions. Use meson to detect if libbpf >= v0.7.0 is linked and if so,
> use
> >>>>> the recommended replacement functions bpf_xdp_query_id,
> >>>> bpf_xdp_attach
> >>>>> and bpf_xdp_detach which are available to use since libbpf v0.7.0.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Also prevent linking with libbpf versions > v0.8.0.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Ciara Loftus <ciara.lof...@intel.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>>     doc/guides/nics/af_xdp.rst          |  3 ++-
> >>>>>     drivers/net/af_xdp/compat.h         | 36
> >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >>>>>     drivers/net/af_xdp/meson.build      |  7 ++----
> >>>>>     drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c | 19 +++------------
> >>>>>     4 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Don't we need to mention these changes in release notes?
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/af_xdp.rst b/doc/guides/nics/af_xdp.rst
> >>>>> index 56681c8365..9edb48df67 100644
> >>>>> --- a/doc/guides/nics/af_xdp.rst
> >>>>> +++ b/doc/guides/nics/af_xdp.rst
> >>>>> @@ -43,7 +43,8 @@ Prerequisites
> >>>>>     This is a Linux-specific PMD, thus the following prerequisites 
> >>>>> apply:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>     *  A Linux Kernel (version > v4.18) with XDP sockets configuration
> >> enabled;
> >>>>> -*  Both libxdp >=v1.2.2 and libbpf libraries installed, or, libbpf
> <=v0.6.0
> >>>>> +*  Both libxdp >=v1.2.2 and libbpf <=v0.8.0 libraries installed, or,
> libbpf
> >>>>> +   <=v0.6.0.
> >>>>>     *  If using libxdp, it requires an environment variable called
> >>>>>        LIBXDP_OBJECT_PATH to be set to the location of where libxdp
> >> placed its
> >>>> bpf
> >>>>>        object files. This is usually in /usr/local/lib/bpf or
> /usr/local/lib64/bpf.
> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/af_xdp/compat.h
> >> b/drivers/net/af_xdp/compat.h
> >>>>> index 28ea64aeaa..8f4ac8b5ea 100644
> >>>>> --- a/drivers/net/af_xdp/compat.h
> >>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/af_xdp/compat.h
> >>>>> @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ tx_syscall_needed(struct xsk_ring_prod *q
> >>>> __rte_unused)
> >>>>>     }
> >>>>>     #endif
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -#ifdef RTE_NET_AF_XDP_LIBBPF_OBJ_OPEN
> >>>>> +#ifdef RTE_NET_AF_XDP_LIBBPF_V070
> >>>>
> >>>> Typically version-based checks are considered as bad. Isn't it
> >>>> better use feature-based checks/defines?
> >>>
> >>> Hi Andrew,
> >>>
> >>> Thank you for the feedback. Is the feature-based checking something
> that
> >> we can push to the next release?
> >>>
> >>> We are already using the pkg-config version-check method for other
> >> libraries/features in the meson.build file:
> >>> * libxdp >= v1.2.2 # earliest compatible libxdp release
> >>> * libbpf >= v0.7.0 # bpf_object__* functions
> >>> * libbpf >= v0.2.0 # shared umem feature
> >>>
> >>> If we change to your suggested method I think we should change them
> all
> >> in one patch. IMO it's probably too close to the release to change them all
> >> right now. What do you think?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Ciara
> >>
> >> Hi Ciara,
> >>
> >> yes, ideally we should avoid usage of version-based check everywhere,
> >> but I don't think that it is critical to switch at once. We can use it
> >> for new checks right now and rewrite old/existing checks a bit later in
> >> the next release.
> >>
> >> Please, note that my notes are related to review notes from Thomas who
> >> asked by file_library() method is removed. Yes, it is confusing and it
> >> is better to avoid it. Usage of feature-based checks would allow to
> >> preserve find_library() as well.
> >
> > Thank you for the explanation.
> > In this case we want to check that the libbpf library is <=v0.8.0. At this
> moment in time v0.8.0 is the latest version of libbpf so we cannot check for a
> symbol that tells us the library is > v0.8.0. Can you think of a way to 
> approach
> this without using the pkg-config version check method?
> >
> > I've introduced this check to future-proof the PMD and ensure we only
> ever link with versions of libbpf that we've validated to be compatible with
> the PMD. When say v0.9.0 is released we can patch the PMD allowing for
> libbpf <= v0.9.0 and make any necessary API changes as part of that patch.
> This should hopefully help avoid the scenario Thomas encountered.
> 
> Personally I'd consider such checks which limit version as a drawback.
> I think checks on build should not be used to reject future versions.
> Otherwise, introduction of any further even minor version would require
> a patch to allow it. Documentation is the place for information about
> validated versions. Build should not enforce it.

Got it. I'll submit a v2 which removes the version-limiting and reinstates the 
cc.find_library() method. I'll update the documentation to indicate only 
versions up to v0.8.0 are supported and add a note to the release notes.
Although if it's too late in the release cycle we can postpone this patch until 
after, and simply patch the docs stating that only libbpf <=v0.7.0 is supported 
for now?

Next release we can move away from the pkg-config version-checking method which 
already exists for other features, and replace with the symbol checking method.

Thanks,
Ciara

Reply via email to