Re: [PATCH net-next v1 6/7] bpf: Use the bpf_load_program() from the library

[Daniel Borkmann]

On 02/06/2017 10:30 PM, MickaÃl SalaÃn wrote:
> On 06/02/2017 20:18, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > On 02/06/2017 08:16 PM, MickaÃl SalaÃn wrote:
> > > On 06/02/2017 16:30, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > > > On 02/06/2017 12:14 AM, MickaÃl SalaÃn wrote:
> > > > > Replace bpf_prog_load() with bpf_load_program() calls.
> > > > >
> > > > > Use the tools include directory instead of the installed one to allow
> > > > > builds from other kernels.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: MickaÃl SalaÃn <mic@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxx>
> > > > > Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >     tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile        |  6 +++++-
> > > > >     tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_sys.h       | 21
> > > > > ---------------------
> > > > >     tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_tag.c      |  6 ++++--
> > > > >     tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c |  8 +++++---
> > > > >     4 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > No objections, but if so, can't we add the remaining missing
> > > > pieces to bpf lib, so we can remove bpf_sys.h altogether?
> > >
> > > OK, I'll send a new patch replacing bpf_sys.h entirely.
> >
> > Sounds great, thanks!
>
> Do you prefer a big patch or one for each replaced function?

I think it makes sense to split it into two: i) this patch as-is
for the prog part, and ii) rest for maps.