[xdp-hints] Re: [PATCH bpf-next 06/11] xdp: Carry over xdp metadata into skb context

[Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>]

On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 10:47 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 09:53:02 -0800 Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > > Jakub was objecting to putting it in the UAPI header, but didn't we
> > > already agree that this wasn't necessary?
> > >
> > > I.e., if we just define
> > >
> > > struct xdp_skb_metadata *bpf_xdp_metadata_export_to_skb()
> > >
> > > as a kfunc, the xdp_skb_metadata struct won't appear in any UAPI headers
> > > and will only be accessible via BTF? And we can put the actual data
> > > wherever we choose, since that bit is nicely hidden behind the kfunc,
> > > while the returned pointer still allows programs to access it.
> > >
> > > We could even make that kfunc smart enough that it checks if the field
> > > is already populated and just return the pointer to the existing data
> > > instead of re-populating it int his case (with a flag to override,
> > > maybe?).
> >
> > Even if we only expose it via btf, I think the fact that we still
> > expose a somewhat fixed layout is the problem?
> > I'm not sure the fact that we're not technically putting in the uapi
> > header is the issue here, but maybe I'm wrong?
> > Jakub?
>
> Until the device metadata access from BPF is in bpf-next the only
> opinion I have on this is something along the lines of "not right now".
>
> I may be missing some concerns / perspectives, in which case - when
> is the next "BPF office hours" meeting?

SG! Let's get back to it once we get the basic rx metadata sorted out.
I'll probably look at the tx part next though; that xdp->skb path is
of least priority for me.