On 5/20/22 9:08 AM, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 8:15 AM Yonghong Song <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/19/22 6:21 PM, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
>>> Add cgroup_rstat_updated() and cgroup_rstat_flush() kfuncs to bpf
>>> tracing programs. bpf programs that make use of rstat can use these
>>> functions to inform rstat when they update stats for a cgroup, and when
>>> they need to flush the stats.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yosry Ahmed <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> kernel/cgroup/rstat.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/rstat.c b/kernel/cgroup/rstat.c
>>> index e7a88d2600bd..a16a851bc0a1 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/cgroup/rstat.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/rstat.c
>>> @@ -3,6 +3,11 @@
>>>
>>> #include <linux/sched/cputime.h>
>>>
>>> +#include <linux/bpf.h>
>>> +#include <linux/btf.h>
>>> +#include <linux/btf_ids.h>
>>> +
>>> +
>>> static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(cgroup_rstat_lock);
>>> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(raw_spinlock_t, cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock);
>>>
>>> @@ -141,7 +146,12 @@ static struct cgroup *cgroup_rstat_cpu_pop_updated(struct cgroup *pos,
>>> return pos;
>>> }
>>>
>>> -/* A hook for bpf stat collectors to attach to and flush their stats */
>>> +/*
>>> + * A hook for bpf stat collectors to attach to and flush their stats.
>>> + * Together with providing bpf kfuncs for cgroup_rstat_updated() and
>>> + * cgroup_rstat_flush(), this enables a complete workflow where bpf progs that
>>> + * collect cgroup stats can integrate with rstat for efficient flushing.
>>> + */
>>> __weak noinline void bpf_rstat_flush(struct cgroup *cgrp,
>>> struct cgroup *parent, int cpu)
>>> {
>>> @@ -476,3 +486,26 @@ void cgroup_base_stat_cputime_show(struct seq_file *seq)
>>> "system_usec %llu\n",
>>> usage, utime, stime);
>>> }
>>> +
>>> +/* Add bpf kfuncs for cgroup_rstat_updated() and cgroup_rstat_flush() */
>>> +BTF_SET_START(bpf_rstat_check_kfunc_ids)
>>> +BTF_ID(func, cgroup_rstat_updated)
>>> +BTF_ID(func, cgroup_rstat_flush)
>>> +BTF_SET_END(bpf_rstat_check_kfunc_ids)
>>> +
>>> +BTF_SET_START(bpf_rstat_sleepable_kfunc_ids)
>>> +BTF_ID(func, cgroup_rstat_flush)
>>> +BTF_SET_END(bpf_rstat_sleepable_kfunc_ids)
>>> +
>>> +static const struct btf_kfunc_id_set bpf_rstat_kfunc_set = {
>>> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
>>> + .check_set = &bpf_rstat_check_kfunc_ids,
>>> + .sleepable_set = &bpf_rstat_sleepable_kfunc_ids,
>>
>> There is a compilation error here:
>>
>> kernel/cgroup/rstat.c:503:3: error: ‘const struct btf_kfunc_id_set’ has
>> no member named ‘sleepable_set’; did you mean ‘release_set’?
>> 503 | .sleepable_set = &bpf_rstat_sleepable_kfunc_ids,
>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> | release_set
>> kernel/cgroup/rstat.c:503:19: warning: excess elements in struct
>> initializer
>> 503 | .sleepable_set = &bpf_rstat_sleepable_kfunc_ids,
>> | ^
>> kernel/cgroup/rstat.c:503:19: note: (near initialization for
>> ‘bpf_rstat_kfunc_set’)
>> make[3]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:288: kernel/cgroup/rstat.o] Error 1
>>
>> Please fix.
>
> This patch series is rebased on top of 2 patches in the mailing list:
> - bpf/btf: also allow kfunc in tracing and syscall programs
> - btf: Add a new kfunc set which allows to mark a function to be
> sleepable
>
> I specified this in the cover letter, do I need to do something else
> in this situation? Re-send the patches as part of my series?
At least put a link in the cover letter for the above two patches?
This way, people can easily find them to double check.
>
>
>
>>
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +static int __init bpf_rstat_kfunc_init(void)
>>> +{
>>> + return register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING,
>>> + &bpf_rstat_kfunc_set);
>>> +}
>>> +late_initcall(bpf_rstat_kfunc_init);
On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 9:16 AM Yonghong Song <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 5/20/22 9:08 AM, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> > On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 8:15 AM Yonghong Song <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 5/19/22 6:21 PM, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> >>> Add cgroup_rstat_updated() and cgroup_rstat_flush() kfuncs to bpf
> >>> tracing programs. bpf programs that make use of rstat can use these
> >>> functions to inform rstat when they update stats for a cgroup, and when
> >>> they need to flush the stats.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Yosry Ahmed <[email protected]>
> >>> ---
> >>> kernel/cgroup/rstat.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >>> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/rstat.c b/kernel/cgroup/rstat.c
> >>> index e7a88d2600bd..a16a851bc0a1 100644
> >>> --- a/kernel/cgroup/rstat.c
> >>> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/rstat.c
> >>> @@ -3,6 +3,11 @@
> >>>
> >>> #include <linux/sched/cputime.h>
> >>>
> >>> +#include <linux/bpf.h>
> >>> +#include <linux/btf.h>
> >>> +#include <linux/btf_ids.h>
> >>> +
> >>> +
> >>> static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(cgroup_rstat_lock);
> >>> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(raw_spinlock_t, cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock);
> >>>
> >>> @@ -141,7 +146,12 @@ static struct cgroup *cgroup_rstat_cpu_pop_updated(struct cgroup *pos,
> >>> return pos;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> -/* A hook for bpf stat collectors to attach to and flush their stats */
> >>> +/*
> >>> + * A hook for bpf stat collectors to attach to and flush their stats.
> >>> + * Together with providing bpf kfuncs for cgroup_rstat_updated() and
> >>> + * cgroup_rstat_flush(), this enables a complete workflow where bpf progs that
> >>> + * collect cgroup stats can integrate with rstat for efficient flushing.
> >>> + */
> >>> __weak noinline void bpf_rstat_flush(struct cgroup *cgrp,
> >>> struct cgroup *parent, int cpu)
> >>> {
> >>> @@ -476,3 +486,26 @@ void cgroup_base_stat_cputime_show(struct seq_file *seq)
> >>> "system_usec %llu\n",
> >>> usage, utime, stime);
> >>> }
> >>> +
> >>> +/* Add bpf kfuncs for cgroup_rstat_updated() and cgroup_rstat_flush() */
> >>> +BTF_SET_START(bpf_rstat_check_kfunc_ids)
> >>> +BTF_ID(func, cgroup_rstat_updated)
> >>> +BTF_ID(func, cgroup_rstat_flush)
> >>> +BTF_SET_END(bpf_rstat_check_kfunc_ids)
> >>> +
> >>> +BTF_SET_START(bpf_rstat_sleepable_kfunc_ids)
> >>> +BTF_ID(func, cgroup_rstat_flush)
> >>> +BTF_SET_END(bpf_rstat_sleepable_kfunc_ids)
> >>> +
> >>> +static const struct btf_kfunc_id_set bpf_rstat_kfunc_set = {
> >>> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> >>> + .check_set = &bpf_rstat_check_kfunc_ids,
> >>> + .sleepable_set = &bpf_rstat_sleepable_kfunc_ids,
> >>
> >> There is a compilation error here:
> >>
> >> kernel/cgroup/rstat.c:503:3: error: ‘const struct btf_kfunc_id_set’ has
> >> no member named ‘sleepable_set’; did you mean ‘release_set’?
> >> 503 | .sleepable_set = &bpf_rstat_sleepable_kfunc_ids,
> >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >> | release_set
> >> kernel/cgroup/rstat.c:503:19: warning: excess elements in struct
> >> initializer
> >> 503 | .sleepable_set = &bpf_rstat_sleepable_kfunc_ids,
> >> | ^
> >> kernel/cgroup/rstat.c:503:19: note: (near initialization for
> >> ‘bpf_rstat_kfunc_set’)
> >> make[3]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:288: kernel/cgroup/rstat.o] Error 1
> >>
> >> Please fix.
> >
> > This patch series is rebased on top of 2 patches in the mailing list:
> > - bpf/btf: also allow kfunc in tracing and syscall programs
> > - btf: Add a new kfunc set which allows to mark a function to be
> > sleepable
> >
> > I specified this in the cover letter, do I need to do something else
> > in this situation? Re-send the patches as part of my series?
>
> At least put a link in the cover letter for the above two patches?
> This way, people can easily find them to double check.
Right. Will do this in the next version. Sorry for the inconvenience.
>
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>> +};
> >>> +
> >>> +static int __init bpf_rstat_kfunc_init(void)
> >>> +{
> >>> + return register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING,
> >>> + &bpf_rstat_kfunc_set);
> >>> +}
> >>> +late_initcall(bpf_rstat_kfunc_init);