Re: [PATCH 4/8] libbpf hashmap: Localize static hashmap__* symbols

[Ian Rogers]

On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 9:31 AM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
<arnaldo.melo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Em Fri, May 15, 2020 at 07:53:33AM -0700, Ian Rogers escreveu:
> > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 7:29 AM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
> > <arnaldo.melo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Em Fri, May 15, 2020 at 11:17:07AM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> > > > On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 11:56:20PM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > > > > Localize the hashmap__* symbols in libbpf.a. To allow for a version in
> > > > > libapi.
> > > > >
> > > > > Before:
> > > > > $ nm libbpf.a
> > > > > ...
> > > > > 000000000002088a t hashmap_add_entry
> > > > > 000000000001712a t hashmap__append
> > > > > 0000000000020aa3 T hashmap__capacity
> > > > > 000000000002099c T hashmap__clear
> > > > > 00000000000208b3 t hashmap_del_entry
> > > > > 0000000000020fc1 T hashmap__delete
> > > > > 0000000000020f29 T hashmap__find
> > > > > 0000000000020c6c t hashmap_find_entry
> > > > > 0000000000020a61 T hashmap__free
> > > > > 0000000000020b08 t hashmap_grow
> > > > > 00000000000208dd T hashmap__init
> > > > > 0000000000020d35 T hashmap__insert
> > > > > 0000000000020ab5 t hashmap_needs_to_grow
> > > > > 0000000000020947 T hashmap__new
> > > > > 0000000000000775 t hashmap__set
> > > > > 00000000000212f8 t hashmap__set
> > > > > 0000000000020a91 T hashmap__size
> > > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > After:
> > > > > $ nm libbpf.a
> > > > > ...
> > > > > 000000000002088a t hashmap_add_entry
> > > > > 000000000001712a t hashmap__append
> > > > > 0000000000020aa3 t hashmap__capacity
> > > > > 000000000002099c t hashmap__clear
> > > > > 00000000000208b3 t hashmap_del_entry
> > > > > 0000000000020fc1 t hashmap__delete
> > > > > 0000000000020f29 t hashmap__find
> > > > > 0000000000020c6c t hashmap_find_entry
> > > > > 0000000000020a61 t hashmap__free
> > > > > 0000000000020b08 t hashmap_grow
> > > > > 00000000000208dd t hashmap__init
> > > > > 0000000000020d35 t hashmap__insert
> > > > > 0000000000020ab5 t hashmap_needs_to_grow
> > > > > 0000000000020947 t hashmap__new
> > > > > 0000000000000775 t hashmap__set
> > > > > 00000000000212f8 t hashmap__set
> > > > > 0000000000020a91 t hashmap__size
> > > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > I think this will break bpf selftests which use hashmap,
> > > > we need to find some other way to include this
> > > >
> > > > either to use it from libbpf directly, or use the api version
> > > > only if the libbpf is not compiled in perf, we could use
> > > > following to detect that:
> > > >
> > > >       CFLAGS += -DHAVE_LIBBPF_SUPPORT
> > > >       $(call detected,CONFIG_LIBBPF)
> > >
> > > And have it in tools/perf/util/ instead?
>
> > *sigh*
>
> > $ make -C tools/testing/selftests/bpf test_hashmap
> > make: Entering directory
> > '/usr/local/google/home/irogers/kernel-trees/kernel.org/tip/tools/testing/s
> > elftests/bpf'
> >  BINARY   test_hashmap
> > /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/ccEGGNw5.o: in function `test_hashmap_generic':
> > /usr/local/google/home/irogers/kernel-trees/kernel.org/tip/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_hashmap.
> > c:61: undefined reference to `hashmap__new'
> > ...
>
> > My preference was to make hashmap a sharable API in tools, to benefit
>
> That is my preference as well, I'm not defending having it in
> tools/perf/util/, just saying that that is a possible way to make
> progress with the current situation...

Thanks, it'd be nice to be expedient as both Jiri and myself are
changing code in this area. v2 is up for review here:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200515165007.217120-8-irogers@xxxxxxxxxx/
An ifdef when the hashmap.h is used, and one in the build. It could be worse.

Thanks,
Ian

> > not just perf but say things like libsymbol, libperf, etc. Moving it
> > into perf and using conditional compilation is kinda gross but having
> > libbpf tests depend on libapi also isn't ideal I guess. It is tempting
> > to just cut a hashmap from fresh cloth to avoid this and to share
> > among tools/. I don't know if the bpf folks have opinions?
> >
> > I'll do a v2 using conditional compilation to see how bad it looks.
>
> Cool, lets see how it looks.
>
> - Arnaldo