On 11/07, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 15:13:33 -0800, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > On 11/07, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 14:43:56 -0800, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > > > bpftool map update pinned /sys/fs/bpf/flow/jmp_table \
> > > > key 0 0 0 0 \
> > > > value pinned /sys/fs/bpf/flow/IP/0
> > >
> > > Where is that /0 coming from ? Is that in source code? I don't see
> > > libbpf adding it, maybe I'm missing something.
> > libbpf adds that, that's a program instance:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c#n1744
>
> Ugh, I was looking at bpf_object__pin() which uses names :(
>
> We never use this multi-instance thing, and I don't think bpftool ever
> will, so IMHO it'd be good if we just re-did the pinning loop in
> bpftool.
I wonder whether I should just add special case to bpf_program__pin: don't
create a subdir when instances.nr == 1 (and just create a file pin for
single instance)? In that case I can continue to use libbpf and don't reinvent
the wheel. Any objections?
