[xdp-hints] Re: [PATCH bpf V7 1/7] selftests/bpf: xdp_hw_metadata default disable bpf_printk

[Jesper Dangaard Brouer <jbrouer@redhat.com>]

On 12/04/2023 00.42, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2023 at 12:24 PM Jesper Dangaard Brouer
> <brouer@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> The tool xdp_hw_metadata can be used by driver developers
>> implementing XDP-hints kfuncs.  The tool transfers the
>> XDP-hints via metadata information to an AF_XDP userspace
>> process. When everything works the bpf_printk calls are
>> unncesssary.  Thus, disable bpf_printk by default, but
>> make it easy to reenable for driver developers to use
>> when debugging their driver implementation.
>>
>> This also converts bpf_printk "forwarding UDP:9091 to AF_XDP"
>> into a code comment.  The bpf_printk's that are important
>> to the driver developers is when bpf_xdp_adjust_meta fails.
>> The likely mistake from driver developers is expected to
>> be that they didn't implement XDP metadata adjust support.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>   .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/xdp_hw_metadata.c  |   16 ++++++++++++++--
>>   1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/xdp_hw_metadata.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/xdp_hw_metadata.c
>> index 4c55b4d79d3d..980eb60d8e5b 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/xdp_hw_metadata.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/xdp_hw_metadata.c
>> @@ -5,6 +5,19 @@
>>   #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
>>   #include <bpf/bpf_endian.h>
>>
>> +/* Per default below bpf_printk() calls are disabled.  Can be
>> + * reenabled manually for convenience by XDP-hints driver developer,
>> + * when troublshooting the drivers kfuncs implementation details.
>> + *
>> + * Remember BPF-prog bpf_printk info output can be access via:
>> + *  /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/trace_pipe
>> + */
>> +//#define DEBUG        1
>> +#ifndef DEBUG
>> +#undef  bpf_printk
>> +#define bpf_printk(fmt, ...) ({})
>> +#endif
> 
> Are you planning to eventually do somethike similar to what I've
> mentioned in [0]? If not, should I try to send a patch?

See next patch:
  - [PATCH bpf V7 2/7] selftests/bpf: Add counters to xdp_hw_metadata

where I add these counters :-)

> 
> 0: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/CAKH8qBupRYEg+SPMTMb4h532GESG7P1QdaFJ-+zrbARVN9xrdA@mail.gmail.com/
>