@@ -1761,6 +1761,11 @@ int bpf_program__pin(struct bpf_program *prog, const char *path)
return -EINVAL;
}
+ if (prog->instances.nr == 1) {
+ /* don't create subdirs when pinning single instance */
+ return bpf_program__pin_instance(prog, path, 0);
+ }
+
err = make_dir(path);
if (err)
return err;
@@ -1823,6 +1828,11 @@ int bpf_program__unpin(struct bpf_program *prog, const char *path)
return -EINVAL;
}
+ if (prog->instances.nr == 1) {
+ /* don't create subdirs when pinning single instance */
+ return bpf_program__unpin_instance(prog, path, 0);
+ }
+
for (i = 0; i < prog->instances.nr; i++) {
char buf[PATH_MAX];
int len;
When bpf_program has only one instance, don't create a subdirectory with per-instance pin files (<prog>/0). Instead, just create a single pin file for that single instance. This simplifies object pinning by not creating unnecessary subdirectories. This can potentially break existing users that depend on the case where '/0' is always created. However, I couldn't find any serious usage of bpf_program__pin inside the kernel tree and I suppose there should be none outside. Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com> --- tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)