Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/3] libbpf: support detecting and attaching of writable tracepoint program
From: Andrii Nakryiko <hidden>
Date: 2021-09-21 21:42:19
Also in:
netdev
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 6:56 PM Hou Tao [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Program on writable tracepoint is BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT_WRITABLE, but its attachment is the same as BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT. Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <redacted> --- tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c index da65a1666a5e..981fcdd95bdc 100644 --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c@@ -7976,6 +7976,10 @@ static const struct bpf_sec_def section_defs[] = { .attach_fn = attach_raw_tp), SEC_DEF("raw_tp/", RAW_TRACEPOINT, .attach_fn = attach_raw_tp), + SEC_DEF("raw_tracepoint_writable/", RAW_TRACEPOINT_WRITABLE, + .attach_fn = attach_raw_tp), + SEC_DEF("raw_tp_writable/", RAW_TRACEPOINT_WRITABLE, + .attach_fn = attach_raw_tp),
_writable is a bit mouthful, maybe we should do the same we did for "sleepable", just add ".w" suffix? So it will be "raw_tp.w/..."? Or does anyone feel it's too subtle?
SEC_DEF("tp_btf/", TRACING,
.expected_attach_type = BPF_TRACE_RAW_TP,
.is_attach_btf = true,
--
2.29.2