On 09/14, Larysa Zaremba wrote:
> There is no fundamental reason, why multi-buffer XDP and XDP kfunc RX hints
> cannot coexist in a single program.
>
> Allow those features to be used together by modifying the flags conditions.
>
> Suggested-by: Stanislav Fomichev <[email protected]>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAKH8qBuzgtJj=OKMdsxEkyML36VsAuZpcrsXcyqjdKXSJCBq=Q@mail.gmail.com/
> Signed-off-by: Larysa Zaremba <[email protected]>
> ---
> kernel/bpf/offload.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/offload.c b/kernel/bpf/offload.c
> index ee35f33a96d1..43aded96c79b 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/offload.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/offload.c
> @@ -232,7 +232,11 @@ int bpf_prog_dev_bound_init(struct bpf_prog *prog, union bpf_attr *attr)
> attr->prog_type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - if (attr->prog_flags & ~BPF_F_XDP_DEV_BOUND_ONLY)
> + if (attr->prog_flags & ~(BPF_F_XDP_DEV_BOUND_ONLY | BPF_F_XDP_HAS_FRAGS))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
[..]
> + if (attr->prog_flags & BPF_F_XDP_HAS_FRAGS &&
> + !(attr->prog_flags & BPF_F_XDP_DEV_BOUND_ONLY))
> return -EINVAL;
Any reason we have 'attr->prog_flags & BPF_F_XDP_HAS_FRAGS' part here?
Seems like doing '!(attr->prog_flags & BPF_F_XDP_DEV_BOUND_ONLY)' should
be enough, right? We only want to bail out here when BPF_F_XDP_DEV_BOUND_ONLY
is not set and we don't really care whether BPF_F_XDP_HAS_FRAGS is set
or not at this point.