Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: 'perf test BPF' failing, libbpf regression wrt "basic API for BPF obj name"

2017-12-01 Thread Alexei Starovoitov
On 12/1/17 9:51 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: But this is not just testcase expectations, the usecase is someone wanting to use a newer tool, with perhaps some new features of interest that don't depend on changes in the kernel, in an older kernel on a system where updating it is not

Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: 'perf test BPF' failing, libbpf regression wrt "basic API for BPF obj name"

2017-12-01 Thread Alexei Starovoitov
On 12/1/17 9:51 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: But this is not just testcase expectations, the usecase is someone wanting to use a newer tool, with perhaps some new features of interest that don't depend on changes in the kernel, in an older kernel on a system where updating it is not

Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: 'perf test BPF' failing, libbpf regression wrt "basic API for BPF obj name"

2017-12-01 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 01:51:15PM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov escreveu: > On 11/30/17 11:00 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > Instead of sinking all future bpf_attr's backward compatibility > > > requirements to sys_bpf, I would push it up to its own BPF_* command > > > helper which has a

Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: 'perf test BPF' failing, libbpf regression wrt "basic API for BPF obj name"

2017-12-01 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 01:51:15PM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov escreveu: > On 11/30/17 11:00 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > Instead of sinking all future bpf_attr's backward compatibility > > > requirements to sys_bpf, I would push it up to its own BPF_* command > > > helper which has a

Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: 'perf test BPF' failing, libbpf regression wrt "basic API for BPF obj name"

2017-11-30 Thread Martin KaFai Lau
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 04:00:42PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:28:08AM -0800, Martin KaFai Lau escreveu: > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 01:53:58PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:01:10AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo >

Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: 'perf test BPF' failing, libbpf regression wrt "basic API for BPF obj name"

2017-11-30 Thread Martin KaFai Lau
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 04:00:42PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:28:08AM -0800, Martin KaFai Lau escreveu: > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 01:53:58PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:01:10AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo >

Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: 'perf test BPF' failing, libbpf regression wrt "basic API for BPF obj name"

2017-11-30 Thread Alexei Starovoitov
On 11/30/17 11:00 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: Instead of sinking all future bpf_attr's backward compatibility requirements to sys_bpf, I would push it up to its own BPF_* command helper which has a better sense of its bpf_attr, i.e. push it up to bpf_create_map_node() and

Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: 'perf test BPF' failing, libbpf regression wrt "basic API for BPF obj name"

2017-11-30 Thread Alexei Starovoitov
On 11/30/17 11:00 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: Instead of sinking all future bpf_attr's backward compatibility requirements to sys_bpf, I would push it up to its own BPF_* command helper which has a better sense of its bpf_attr, i.e. push it up to bpf_create_map_node() and

Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: 'perf test BPF' failing, libbpf regression wrt "basic API for BPF obj name"

2017-11-30 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:28:08AM -0800, Martin KaFai Lau escreveu: > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 01:53:58PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:01:10AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: > > > Em Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 02:31:36PM -0800, Martin KaFai Lau

Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: 'perf test BPF' failing, libbpf regression wrt "basic API for BPF obj name"

2017-11-30 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:28:08AM -0800, Martin KaFai Lau escreveu: > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 01:53:58PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:01:10AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: > > > Em Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 02:31:36PM -0800, Martin KaFai Lau

Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: 'perf test BPF' failing, libbpf regression wrt "basic API for BPF obj name"

2017-11-30 Thread Martin KaFai Lau
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 01:53:58PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:01:10AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: > > Em Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 02:31:36PM -0800, Martin KaFai Lau escreveu: > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 06:15:43PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo

Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: 'perf test BPF' failing, libbpf regression wrt "basic API for BPF obj name"

2017-11-30 Thread Martin KaFai Lau
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 01:53:58PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:01:10AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: > > Em Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 02:31:36PM -0800, Martin KaFai Lau escreveu: > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 06:15:43PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo

[PATCH/RFC] Re: 'perf test BPF' failing, libbpf regression wrt "basic API for BPF obj name"

2017-11-30 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:01:10AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: > Em Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 02:31:36PM -0800, Martin KaFai Lau escreveu: > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 06:15:43PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > Em Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 01:07:34PM -0800, Martin KaFai Lau

[PATCH/RFC] Re: 'perf test BPF' failing, libbpf regression wrt "basic API for BPF obj name"

2017-11-30 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:01:10AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: > Em Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 02:31:36PM -0800, Martin KaFai Lau escreveu: > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 06:15:43PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > Em Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 01:07:34PM -0800, Martin KaFai Lau