diff options
| author | Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> | 2021-08-15 00:05:54 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> | 2021-08-17 00:45:07 +0200 |
| commit | fb7dd8bca0139fd73d3f4a6cd257b11731317ded (patch) | |
| tree | 9006ce2d61e9cd8c9fa353e5cff61d5f6da09031 /net/bpf | |
| parent | 1bda52f80471260bcc7391f4e6919effedfc88d8 (diff) | |
| download | linux-fb7dd8bca0139fd73d3f4a6cd257b11731317ded.tar.gz linux-fb7dd8bca0139fd73d3f4a6cd257b11731317ded.tar.xz | |
bpf: Refactor BPF_PROG_RUN into a function
Turn BPF_PROG_RUN into a proper always inlined function. No functional and
performance changes are intended, but it makes it much easier to understand
what's going on with how BPF programs are actually get executed. It's more
obvious what types and callbacks are expected. Also extra () around input
parameters can be dropped, as well as `__` variable prefixes intended to avoid
naming collisions, which makes the code simpler to read and write.
This refactoring also highlighted one extra issue. BPF_PROG_RUN is both
a macro and an enum value (BPF_PROG_RUN == BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN). Turning
BPF_PROG_RUN into a function causes naming conflict compilation error. So
rename BPF_PROG_RUN into lower-case bpf_prog_run(), similar to
bpf_prog_run_xdp(), bpf_prog_run_pin_on_cpu(), etc. All existing callers of
BPF_PROG_RUN, the macro, are switched to bpf_prog_run() explicitly.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210815070609.987780-2-andrii@kernel.org
Diffstat (limited to 'net/bpf')
| -rw-r--r-- | net/bpf/test_run.c | 6 |
1 files changed, 3 insertions, 3 deletions
diff --git a/net/bpf/test_run.c b/net/bpf/test_run.c index 4b855af267b1..2eb0e55ef54d 100644 --- a/net/bpf/test_run.c +++ b/net/bpf/test_run.c @@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ static int bpf_test_run(struct bpf_prog *prog, void *ctx, u32 repeat, if (xdp) *retval = bpf_prog_run_xdp(prog, ctx); else - *retval = BPF_PROG_RUN(prog, ctx); + *retval = bpf_prog_run(prog, ctx); } while (bpf_test_timer_continue(&t, repeat, &ret, time)); bpf_reset_run_ctx(old_ctx); bpf_test_timer_leave(&t); @@ -327,7 +327,7 @@ __bpf_prog_test_run_raw_tp(void *data) struct bpf_raw_tp_test_run_info *info = data; rcu_read_lock(); - info->retval = BPF_PROG_RUN(info->prog, info->ctx); + info->retval = bpf_prog_run(info->prog, info->ctx); rcu_read_unlock(); } @@ -989,7 +989,7 @@ int bpf_prog_test_run_sk_lookup(struct bpf_prog *prog, const union bpf_attr *kat bpf_test_timer_enter(&t); do { ctx.selected_sk = NULL; - retval = BPF_PROG_SK_LOOKUP_RUN_ARRAY(progs, ctx, BPF_PROG_RUN); + retval = BPF_PROG_SK_LOOKUP_RUN_ARRAY(progs, ctx, bpf_prog_run); } while (bpf_test_timer_continue(&t, repeat, &ret, &duration)); bpf_test_timer_leave(&t); |