-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 75
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Support probing for kfuncs availability #98
Comments
Interesting, I thought kfuncs were encoded into BTF. I see a reference to that here: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/0e389834672c723435a44818ed2cabc4dad24429/kernel/bpf/btf.c#L7669 Mind double checking me on that? If kfuncs availability can be pulled from BTF feel free to give this one to me -- it's been bugging me for a while |
Hey, thanks Daniel for looking into this! As far as I'm aware, kfuncs and their prototypes are indeed available in the raw BTF, but I can't see them in the What do you have in mind, exactly? |
Ah makes sense. In that case, I was thinking of adding a BTF tag to all kfunc via
I'm interested in two things:
|
Oh, BTF tags only work for clang built linux. Lemme think on it more |
Would be great to have these tags, indeed. Thanks! |
So I think this approach is probably still doable, except we cannot use BTF type tags from kernel side. Instead we'd probably want to teach pahole to parse the |
Could be worth opening a thread on bpf@, I wouldn't be surprised if other people are interested in listing the kfuncs, too. Some may even have more suggestions, or cycles to take a look? |
Fixed in 3e0251a. |
Similarly to what we do for program types, map types, helpers, and a few other components, we could look into dumping supported
kfuncs
withbpftool feature probe
.It is not clear yet what the probes would look like.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: