On 12/11/2018 01:10 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:

On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 16:34:43 +0100, Magnus Karlsson wrote:

quoted

* Is it ok to have static inline functions in this library? They are
  currently static inline for performance reasons, but maybe -flto
  could fix this but not everyone uses this.

I'd think so, we have few static inlines in kernel uapi headers.
 

quoted

* I have included 3 more header files compared to libbpf without AF_XDP
  functionality: barrier.h (for the memory barriers used for correctly
  ordered accesses to the rings) compiler.h (for one unliekly and one
  likely with a tiny performance impact, if any) and list.h (some
  extra functions). What to do with these (and the header files they
  include) as they need to be dual licensed for libbpf.so?

Indeed, but I think we already have that problem, we include barrier.h
indirectly for the perf ring helper which in turn includes compiler.h
and list.h is included directly.

There's an automated mirror here [0] for stand-alone build and it
reimplements the few dependency headers, so generally not an issue.

Thanks,
Daniel

  [0] https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf