Re: [PATCH v2 02/13] bpf tools: Extract and collect map names from BPF object file
From: Wangnan (F)
Date: Mon Nov 30 2015 - 04:49:01 EST
On 2015/11/30 17:43, Namhyung Kim wrote:
On November 30, 2015 6:27:57 PM GMT+09:00, "Wangnan (F)" <wangnan0@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2015/11/30 16:51, Namhyung Kim wrote:
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 01:00:46PM +0800, Wangnan (F) wrote:
On 2015/11/30 0:14, Namhyung Kim wrote:
Hi Wang,
On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 08:47:36AM +0000, Wang Nan wrote:
This patch collects name of maps in BPF object files and saves
them into
'maps' field in 'struct bpf_object'. 'bpf_object__get_map_by_name'
is
introduced to retrive fd and definitions of a map through its
name.
Signed-off-by: Wang Nan <wangnan0@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: He Kuang <hekuang@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Zefan Li <lizefan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: pi3orama@xxxxxxx
---
tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 65
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h | 3 +++
2 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
index f509825..a298614 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
@@ -165,6 +165,7 @@ struct bpf_program {
struct bpf_map {
int fd;
+ char *name;
struct bpf_map_def def;
void *priv;
bpf_map_clear_priv_t clear_priv;
@@ -526,12 +527,46 @@ bpf_object__init_maps(struct bpf_object
*obj, void *data,
return 0;
}
+static void
+bpf_object__init_maps_name(struct bpf_object *obj, int
maps_shndx)
+{
+ int i;
+ Elf_Data *symbols = obj->efile.symbols;
+
+ if (!symbols || maps_shndx < 0)
+ return;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < symbols->d_size / sizeof(GElf_Sym); i++) {
+ GElf_Sym sym;
+ size_t map_idx;
+ const char *map_name;
+
+ if (!gelf_getsym(symbols, i, &sym))
+ continue;
+ if (sym.st_shndx != maps_shndx)
+ continue;
+
+ map_name = elf_strptr(obj->efile.elf,
+ obj->efile.ehdr.e_shstrndx,
+ sym.st_name);
It means that each map name is saved in section header string
table?
According to elf format specification:
For an symbol table entry, the st_name field "holds an index
into the object fileâs symbol string table, which holds the
character representations of the symbol names. If the value
is non-zero, it represents a string table index that gives
the symbol name. Otherwise, the symbol table entry has no
name."
And so called "object fileâs symbol string table" is a
section in the object file which index is stored into
ehdr and be loaded during gelf_getehdr(), and its index
would be set to ehdr->e_shstrndx. So I think for each map
its name should be saved in that string table.
AFAIK there're two symbol string tables in a ELF file. One for
section headers (.shstrtab) and another for normal symbols (.strtab).
And ehdr->e_shstrndx is the index of section header string table so
your code assumes map names are saved in the section header string
table, right?
Thanks,
Namhyung
In case of gcc:
$ echo 'int func() {return 0;}' | gcc -x c -c -o ./temp.o -
$ readelf -h ./temp.o
ELF Header:
Magic: 7f 45 4c 46 02 01 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Class: ELF64
Data: 2's complement, little endian
Version: 1 (current)
OS/ABI: UNIX - System V
ABI Version: 0
Type: REL (Relocatable file)
Machine: Advanced Micro Devices X86-64
Version: 0x1
Entry point address: 0x0
Start of program headers: 0 (bytes into file)
Start of section headers: 240 (bytes into file)
Flags: 0x0
Size of this header: 64 (bytes)
Size of program headers: 0 (bytes)
Number of program headers: 0
Size of section headers: 64 (bytes)
Number of section headers: 11
Section header string table index: 8
Let's see what is section 8:
$ readelf -S ./temp.o
...
[ 8] .shstrtab STRTAB 0000000000000000 00000098
0000000000000054 0000000000000000 0 0 1
...
Yes, in this case it is .shstrtab.
However, this is what I found when using llvm:
$ echo 'int func() {return 0;}' | x86_64-oe-linux-clang -x c -c -o
./temp.o -
ELF Header:
Magic: 7f 45 4c 46 02 01 01 03 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Class: ELF64
Data: 2's complement, little endian
Version: 1 (current)
OS/ABI: UNIX - GNU
ABI Version: 0
Type: REL (Relocatable file)
Machine: Advanced Micro Devices X86-64
Version: 0x1
Entry point address: 0x0
Start of program headers: 0 (bytes into file)
Start of section headers: 648 (bytes into file)
Flags: 0x0
Size of this header: 64 (bytes)
Size of program headers: 0 (bytes)
Number of program headers: 0
Size of section headers: 64 (bytes)
Number of section headers: 10
Section header string table index: 1
$ readelf -S ./temp.o
There are 10 section headers, starting at offset 0x288:
Section Headers:
[Nr] Name Type Address Offset
Size EntSize Flags Link Info Align
[ 0] NULL 0000000000000000 00000000
0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0 0 0
[ 1] .strtab STRTAB 0000000000000000 00000230
0000000000000051 0000000000000000 0 0 1
This time it is strtab.
And here is the content of strtab:
$ readelf -p .strtab ./temp.o
String dump of section '.strtab':
[ 1] .text
[ 7] .comment
[ 10] .bss
[ 15] .note.GNU-stack
[ 25] .rela.eh_frame
[ 34] func
[ 39] .strtab
[ 41] .symtab
[ 49] .data
[ 4f] -
Note that I don't use BPF backend. This is a normal x86 compiling.
So seems it is the default behavior of LLVM.
Ah, didn't know that. So strtab has section header strings as well as normal symbol strings when compiled with LLVM, right? It'd be great if you add comment about it.
I think technically speaking you are right, because I haven't see any
documentation
about it, so I don't know the reason why LLVM behave like this, and
don't know
whether it would change it in future. And it is also possible that we
will have
other compiler to compile BPF source file. Now I'm reading readelf's
code and try to
find a canonical way for it.
Thank you for your review.
Thanks,
Namhyung
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/