Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/5] bpftool: Make probes which emit dmesg warnings optional

[Michal Rostecki]

On 2/21/20 11:44 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 11:28:05AM +0000, Quentin Monnet wrote:
>>
>> "trace" sounds too generic. If filters are applied again to prog and map
>> types in the future (as you had in v1), this would catch tracepoint and
>> raw_tracepoint program types and stack_trace map type. Or if new helpers
>> with "trace" in their name are added, we skip them too. Can we use something
>> more specific, probably "trace_printk"?
> 
> +1
> 
>> Thanks for the patch! While I understand you want to keep the changes you
>> have done to use regex, I do not really think they bring much in this
>> version of the patch. As we only want to filter out two specific helpers, it
>> seems to me that it would be much simpler to just compare helper names
>> instead of introducing regular expressions that are not used otherwise. What
>> do you think?
> 
> +1
> I was thinking the same.
> Or filter by specific integer id of the helper.
> 

I like the idea of filtering by id. I will do that in v3. Thanks for review!