diff mbox series

[bpf-next,v3,1/2] bpftool: Add auto_attach for bpf prog load|loadall

Message ID 1662702807-591-1-git-send-email-wangyufen@huawei.com (mailing list archive)
State Superseded
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series [bpf-next,v3,1/2] bpftool: Add auto_attach for bpf prog load|loadall | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for bpf-next
netdev/fixes_present success Fixes tag not required for -next series
netdev/subject_prefix success Link
netdev/cover_letter success Single patches do not need cover letters
netdev/patch_count success Link
netdev/header_inline success No static functions without inline keyword in header files
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/cc_maintainers success CCed 17 of 17 maintainers
netdev/build_clang success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/module_param success Was 0 now: 0
netdev/verify_signedoff success Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer
netdev/check_selftest success No net selftest shell script
netdev/verify_fixes success No Fixes tag
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/checkpatch success total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 106 lines checked
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/source_inline success Was 0 now: 0
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-11 success Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-1 success Logs for build for s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-13 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-14 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-16 success Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-17 success Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-7 success Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-8 success Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-10 success Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-9 success Logs for test_progs on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-12 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-15 success Logs for test_verifier on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR fail PR summary
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-6 success Logs for test_maps on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-4 success Logs for llvm-toolchain
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-5 success Logs for set-matrix
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-2 success Logs for build for x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-3 success Logs for build for x86_64 with llvm-16

Commit Message

wangyufen Sept. 9, 2022, 5:53 a.m. UTC 
Add auto_attach optional to support one-step load-attach-pin_link.

For example,
   $ bpftool prog loadall test.o /sys/fs/bpf/test auto_attach

   $ bpftool link
   26: tracing  name test1  tag f0da7d0058c00236  gpl
   	loaded_at 2022-09-09T21:39:49+0800  uid 0
   	xlated 88B  jited 55B  memlock 4096B  map_ids 3
   	btf_id 55
   28: kprobe  name test3  tag 002ef1bef0723833  gpl
   	loaded_at 2022-09-09T21:39:49+0800  uid 0
   	xlated 88B  jited 56B  memlock 4096B  map_ids 3
   	btf_id 55
   57: tracepoint  name oncpu  tag 7aa55dfbdcb78941  gpl
   	loaded_at 2022-09-09T21:41:32+0800  uid 0
   	xlated 456B  jited 265B  memlock 4096B  map_ids 17,13,14,15
   	btf_id 82

   $ bpftool link
   1: tracing  prog 26
   	prog_type tracing  attach_type trace_fentry
   3: perf_event  prog 28
   10: perf_event  prog 57

The auto_attach optional can support tracepoints, k(ret)probes,
u(ret)probes.

Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <weiyongjun1@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Wang Yufen <wangyufen@huawei.com>
---
v2 -> v3: switch to extend prog load command instead of extend perf
v2: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20220824033837.458197-1-weiyongjun1@huawei.com/
v1: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20220816151725.153343-1-weiyongjun1@huawei.com/
 tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Quentin Monnet Sept. 9, 2022, 11:38 a.m. UTC | #1 
On 09/09/2022 06:53, Wang Yufen wrote:
> Add auto_attach optional to support one-step load-attach-pin_link.
> 
> For example,
>    $ bpftool prog loadall test.o /sys/fs/bpf/test auto_attach
> 
>    $ bpftool link
>    26: tracing  name test1  tag f0da7d0058c00236  gpl
>    	loaded_at 2022-09-09T21:39:49+0800  uid 0
>    	xlated 88B  jited 55B  memlock 4096B  map_ids 3
>    	btf_id 55
>    28: kprobe  name test3  tag 002ef1bef0723833  gpl
>    	loaded_at 2022-09-09T21:39:49+0800  uid 0
>    	xlated 88B  jited 56B  memlock 4096B  map_ids 3
>    	btf_id 55
>    57: tracepoint  name oncpu  tag 7aa55dfbdcb78941  gpl
>    	loaded_at 2022-09-09T21:41:32+0800  uid 0
>    	xlated 456B  jited 265B  memlock 4096B  map_ids 17,13,14,15
>    	btf_id 82
> 
>    $ bpftool link
>    1: tracing  prog 26
>    	prog_type tracing  attach_type trace_fentry
>    3: perf_event  prog 28
>    10: perf_event  prog 57
> 
> The auto_attach optional can support tracepoints, k(ret)probes,
> u(ret)probes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <weiyongjun1@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Yufen <wangyufen@huawei.com>

Thanks, looks better! I just have some minor comments, please see inline
below.

> ---
> v2 -> v3: switch to extend prog load command instead of extend perf
> v2: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20220824033837.458197-1-weiyongjun1@huawei.com/
> v1: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20220816151725.153343-1-weiyongjun1@huawei.com/
>  tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
> index c81362a..853a73e 100644
> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
> @@ -1453,6 +1453,68 @@ static int do_run(int argc, char **argv)
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static int
> +do_prog_attach_pin(struct bpf_program *prog, const char *path)

Can we rename this function please? The pattern "do_...()" looks like
one of the names for the functions we use for the subcommands via the
struct cmd. Maybe auto_attach_program()?

> +{
> +	struct bpf_link *link = NULL;

Nit: No need to initialise link

> +	int err;
> +
> +	link = bpf_program__attach(prog);
> +	err = libbpf_get_error(link);
> +	if (err)
> +		return err;
> +
> +	err = bpf_link__pin(link, path);
> +	if (err) {
> +		bpf_link__destroy(link);
> +		return err;
> +	}
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int pathname_concat(const char *path, const char *name, char *buf)
> +{
> +	int len;
> +
> +	len = snprintf(buf, PATH_MAX, "%s/%s", path, name);
> +	if (len < 0)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	else if (len >= PATH_MAX)

Nit: "else" not necessary, you returned if len < 0.

> +		return -ENAMETOOLONG;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int
> +do_obj_attach_pin_programs(struct bpf_object *obj, const char *path)

Same, can we rename this function please?

> +{
> +	struct bpf_program *prog;
> +	char buf[PATH_MAX];
> +	int err;
> +
> +	bpf_object__for_each_program(prog, obj) {
> +		err = pathname_concat(path, bpf_program__name(prog), buf);
> +		if (err)
> +			goto err_unpin_programs;
> +
> +		err = do_prog_attach_pin(prog, buf);
> +		if (err)
> +			goto err_unpin_programs;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +
> +err_unpin_programs:
> +	while ((prog = bpf_object__prev_program(obj, prog))) {
> +		if (pathname_concat(path, bpf_program__name(prog), buf))
> +			continue;
> +
> +		bpf_program__unpin(prog, buf);
> +	}
> +
> +	return err;
> +}
> +
>  static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
>  {
>  	enum bpf_prog_type common_prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_UNSPEC;
> @@ -1464,6 +1526,7 @@ static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
>  	struct bpf_program *prog = NULL, *pos;
>  	unsigned int old_map_fds = 0;
>  	const char *pinmaps = NULL;
> +	bool auto_attach = false;
>  	struct bpf_object *obj;
>  	struct bpf_map *map;
>  	const char *pinfile;
> @@ -1583,6 +1646,9 @@ static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
>  				goto err_free_reuse_maps;
>  
>  			pinmaps = GET_ARG();
> +		} else if (is_prefix(*argv, "auto_attach")) {
> +			auto_attach = true;
> +			NEXT_ARG();
>  		} else {
>  			p_err("expected no more arguments, 'type', 'map' or 'dev', got: '%s'?",
>  			      *argv);
> @@ -1692,14 +1758,20 @@ static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
>  			goto err_close_obj;
>  		}
>  
> -		err = bpf_obj_pin(bpf_program__fd(prog), pinfile);
> +		if (auto_attach)
> +			err = do_prog_attach_pin(prog, pinfile);
> +		else
> +			err = bpf_obj_pin(bpf_program__fd(prog), pinfile);
>  		if (err) {
>  			p_err("failed to pin program %s",
>  			      bpf_program__section_name(prog));
>  			goto err_close_obj;
>  		}
>  	} else {
> -		err = bpf_object__pin_programs(obj, pinfile);
> +		if (auto_attach)
> +			err = do_obj_attach_pin_programs(obj, pinfile);
> +		else
> +			err = bpf_object__pin_programs(obj, pinfile);
>  		if (err) {
>  			p_err("failed to pin all programs");
>  			goto err_close_obj;

Please update the usage string in do_help() at the end of the file.
wangyufen Sept. 13, 2022, 2:40 a.m. UTC | #2 
在 2022/9/9 19:38, Quentin Monnet 写道:
> On 09/09/2022 06:53, Wang Yufen wrote:
>> Add auto_attach optional to support one-step load-attach-pin_link.
>>
>> For example,
>>     $ bpftool prog loadall test.o /sys/fs/bpf/test auto_attach
>>
>>     $ bpftool link
>>     26: tracing  name test1  tag f0da7d0058c00236  gpl
>>     	loaded_at 2022-09-09T21:39:49+0800  uid 0
>>     	xlated 88B  jited 55B  memlock 4096B  map_ids 3
>>     	btf_id 55
>>     28: kprobe  name test3  tag 002ef1bef0723833  gpl
>>     	loaded_at 2022-09-09T21:39:49+0800  uid 0
>>     	xlated 88B  jited 56B  memlock 4096B  map_ids 3
>>     	btf_id 55
>>     57: tracepoint  name oncpu  tag 7aa55dfbdcb78941  gpl
>>     	loaded_at 2022-09-09T21:41:32+0800  uid 0
>>     	xlated 456B  jited 265B  memlock 4096B  map_ids 17,13,14,15
>>     	btf_id 82
>>
>>     $ bpftool link
>>     1: tracing  prog 26
>>     	prog_type tracing  attach_type trace_fentry
>>     3: perf_event  prog 28
>>     10: perf_event  prog 57
>>
>> The auto_attach optional can support tracepoints, k(ret)probes,
>> u(ret)probes.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <weiyongjun1@huawei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Wang Yufen <wangyufen@huawei.com>
> Thanks, looks better! I just have some minor comments, please see inline
> below.
>
>> ---
>> v2 -> v3: switch to extend prog load command instead of extend perf
>> v2: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20220824033837.458197-1-weiyongjun1@huawei.com/
>> v1: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20220816151725.153343-1-weiyongjun1@huawei.com/
>>   tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>   1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
>> index c81362a..853a73e 100644
>> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
>> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
>> @@ -1453,6 +1453,68 @@ static int do_run(int argc, char **argv)
>>   	return ret;
>>   }
>>   
>> +static int
>> +do_prog_attach_pin(struct bpf_program *prog, const char *path)
> Can we rename this function please? The pattern "do_...()" looks like
> one of the names for the functions we use for the subcommands via the
> struct cmd. Maybe auto_attach_program()?
>
>> +{
>> +	struct bpf_link *link = NULL;
> Nit: No need to initialise link
>
>> +	int err;
>> +
>> +	link = bpf_program__attach(prog);
>> +	err = libbpf_get_error(link);
>> +	if (err)
>> +		return err;
>> +
>> +	err = bpf_link__pin(link, path);
>> +	if (err) {
>> +		bpf_link__destroy(link);
>> +		return err;
>> +	}
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int pathname_concat(const char *path, const char *name, char *buf)
>> +{
>> +	int len;
>> +
>> +	len = snprintf(buf, PATH_MAX, "%s/%s", path, name);
>> +	if (len < 0)
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	else if (len >= PATH_MAX)
> Nit: "else" not necessary, you returned if len < 0.
>
>> +		return -ENAMETOOLONG;
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +do_obj_attach_pin_programs(struct bpf_object *obj, const char *path)
> Same, can we rename this function please?
>
>> +{
>> +	struct bpf_program *prog;
>> +	char buf[PATH_MAX];
>> +	int err;
>> +
>> +	bpf_object__for_each_program(prog, obj) {
>> +		err = pathname_concat(path, bpf_program__name(prog), buf);
>> +		if (err)
>> +			goto err_unpin_programs;
>> +
>> +		err = do_prog_attach_pin(prog, buf);
>> +		if (err)
>> +			goto err_unpin_programs;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +
>> +err_unpin_programs:
>> +	while ((prog = bpf_object__prev_program(obj, prog))) {
>> +		if (pathname_concat(path, bpf_program__name(prog), buf))
>> +			continue;
>> +
>> +		bpf_program__unpin(prog, buf);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	return err;
>> +}
>> +
>>   static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
>>   {
>>   	enum bpf_prog_type common_prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_UNSPEC;
>> @@ -1464,6 +1526,7 @@ static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
>>   	struct bpf_program *prog = NULL, *pos;
>>   	unsigned int old_map_fds = 0;
>>   	const char *pinmaps = NULL;
>> +	bool auto_attach = false;
>>   	struct bpf_object *obj;
>>   	struct bpf_map *map;
>>   	const char *pinfile;
>> @@ -1583,6 +1646,9 @@ static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
>>   				goto err_free_reuse_maps;
>>   
>>   			pinmaps = GET_ARG();
>> +		} else if (is_prefix(*argv, "auto_attach")) {
>> +			auto_attach = true;
>> +			NEXT_ARG();
>>   		} else {
>>   			p_err("expected no more arguments, 'type', 'map' or 'dev', got: '%s'?",
>>   			      *argv);
>> @@ -1692,14 +1758,20 @@ static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
>>   			goto err_close_obj;
>>   		}
>>   
>> -		err = bpf_obj_pin(bpf_program__fd(prog), pinfile);
>> +		if (auto_attach)
>> +			err = do_prog_attach_pin(prog, pinfile);
>> +		else
>> +			err = bpf_obj_pin(bpf_program__fd(prog), pinfile);
>>   		if (err) {
>>   			p_err("failed to pin program %s",
>>   			      bpf_program__section_name(prog));
>>   			goto err_close_obj;
>>   		}
>>   	} else {
>> -		err = bpf_object__pin_programs(obj, pinfile);
>> +		if (auto_attach)
>> +			err = do_obj_attach_pin_programs(obj, pinfile);
>> +		else
>> +			err = bpf_object__pin_programs(obj, pinfile);
>>   		if (err) {
>>   			p_err("failed to pin all programs");
>>   			goto err_close_obj;
> Please update the usage string in do_help() at the end of the file.

Thanks for your comments.
All will do in v4.
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
index c81362a..853a73e 100644
--- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
+++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
@@ -1453,6 +1453,68 @@  static int do_run(int argc, char **argv)
 	return ret;
 }
 
+static int
+do_prog_attach_pin(struct bpf_program *prog, const char *path)
+{
+	struct bpf_link *link = NULL;
+	int err;
+
+	link = bpf_program__attach(prog);
+	err = libbpf_get_error(link);
+	if (err)
+		return err;
+
+	err = bpf_link__pin(link, path);
+	if (err) {
+		bpf_link__destroy(link);
+		return err;
+	}
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static int pathname_concat(const char *path, const char *name, char *buf)
+{
+	int len;
+
+	len = snprintf(buf, PATH_MAX, "%s/%s", path, name);
+	if (len < 0)
+		return -EINVAL;
+	else if (len >= PATH_MAX)
+		return -ENAMETOOLONG;
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static int
+do_obj_attach_pin_programs(struct bpf_object *obj, const char *path)
+{
+	struct bpf_program *prog;
+	char buf[PATH_MAX];
+	int err;
+
+	bpf_object__for_each_program(prog, obj) {
+		err = pathname_concat(path, bpf_program__name(prog), buf);
+		if (err)
+			goto err_unpin_programs;
+
+		err = do_prog_attach_pin(prog, buf);
+		if (err)
+			goto err_unpin_programs;
+	}
+
+	return 0;
+
+err_unpin_programs:
+	while ((prog = bpf_object__prev_program(obj, prog))) {
+		if (pathname_concat(path, bpf_program__name(prog), buf))
+			continue;
+
+		bpf_program__unpin(prog, buf);
+	}
+
+	return err;
+}
+
 static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
 {
 	enum bpf_prog_type common_prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_UNSPEC;
@@ -1464,6 +1526,7 @@  static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
 	struct bpf_program *prog = NULL, *pos;
 	unsigned int old_map_fds = 0;
 	const char *pinmaps = NULL;
+	bool auto_attach = false;
 	struct bpf_object *obj;
 	struct bpf_map *map;
 	const char *pinfile;
@@ -1583,6 +1646,9 @@  static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
 				goto err_free_reuse_maps;
 
 			pinmaps = GET_ARG();
+		} else if (is_prefix(*argv, "auto_attach")) {
+			auto_attach = true;
+			NEXT_ARG();
 		} else {
 			p_err("expected no more arguments, 'type', 'map' or 'dev', got: '%s'?",
 			      *argv);
@@ -1692,14 +1758,20 @@  static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
 			goto err_close_obj;
 		}
 
-		err = bpf_obj_pin(bpf_program__fd(prog), pinfile);
+		if (auto_attach)
+			err = do_prog_attach_pin(prog, pinfile);
+		else
+			err = bpf_obj_pin(bpf_program__fd(prog), pinfile);
 		if (err) {
 			p_err("failed to pin program %s",
 			      bpf_program__section_name(prog));
 			goto err_close_obj;
 		}
 	} else {
-		err = bpf_object__pin_programs(obj, pinfile);
+		if (auto_attach)
+			err = do_obj_attach_pin_programs(obj, pinfile);
+		else
+			err = bpf_object__pin_programs(obj, pinfile);
 		if (err) {
 			p_err("failed to pin all programs");
 			goto err_close_obj;