Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf v2] libbpf: Move BPF_SEQ_PRINTF and BPF_SNPRINTF to
 bpf_helpers.h
To:     Florent Revest <revest@chromium.org>, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, kpsingh@kernel.org,
        jackmanb@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20210525201825.2729018-1-revest@chromium.org>
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Message-ID: <f3e6c21e-8d6e-2665-770c-65f9b98ccf93@iogearbox.net>
Date:   Wed, 26 May 2021 08:35:19 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210525201825.2729018-1-revest@chromium.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 5/25/21 10:18 PM, Florent Revest wrote:
> These macros are convenient wrappers around the bpf_seq_printf and
> bpf_snprintf helpers. They are currently provided by bpf_tracing.h which
> targets low level tracing primitives. bpf_helpers.h is a better fit.
> 
> The __bpf_narg and __bpf_apply macros are needed in both files so
> provided twice and guarded by ifndefs.
> 
> Reported-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Florent Revest <revest@chromium.org>

Given v1/v2 both target bpf tree in the subject, do you really mean bpf or
rather bpf-next?

Thanks,
Daniel