Re: Is it a good idea to export certain internal structure declaration to make bcc/ebpf happier?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 2.04.19 г. 10:41 ч., Qu Wenruo wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm recently working on crafting a small bcc based script to show how
> btrfs tree block concurrency.
> 
> The prototype is here:
> https://gist.github.com/adam900710/63db6cdc7d26c4744a53dfc7755fafda
> 
> However it has some problems, and cannot be used directly on latest kernel.
> 
> - No way to pass btrfs headers into eBPF code.
>   This is because the declaration of extent_buffer is in
>   `fs/btrfs/extent_io.h`.
>   No in the common kernel headers search path.
> 
> - eBPF program can't access btrfs_header_owner() helper.
>   Even we make eBPF code understand the headers, we can't
>   access a lot of kernel functions, like btrfs_header_owner().
> 
> So I'm wondering is it possible for us to export extent_buffer
> declaration just for possible eBPF usage.
 >
> Or is bcc suit strong enough to handle such case?
> 
> The diff would be something like this to make above bcc script work:
> 


Hell no, that is _very_ ugly as hell. If you want to access such
information why not introduce tracepoints which have enough context so
that when they are used with ebpf you can query the data from the
tracepoint? I *think* this ought to be made to work with ebpf?



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux