Re: [PATCH v4] lib/bpf: Rename bpf function names to avoid potential conflict with libpcap

[Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru>]

12/03/2023 06:20, J.J. Martzki пишет:
> The library libpcap has their function 'bpf_validate' either so there would
> be a multiple definition issue when linking with librte_bpf.a and libpcap.a
> statically (Same as http://dpdk.org/patch/52631). So just rename the
> function names to avoid such issue.
> 
> Signed-off-by: J.J. Martzki <mars14850@gmail.com>
> 
> ---
> v4:
> * Update my name.
> v3:
> * Rewrite the commit message.
> v2:
> * Rename all functions in bpf_impl.h.
> * Adjust the commit message.
> ---
>   lib/bpf/bpf.c           |  6 +++---
>   lib/bpf/bpf_convert.c   |  3 ---
>   lib/bpf/bpf_impl.h      | 10 ++++------
>   lib/bpf/bpf_jit_arm64.c |  2 +-
>   lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c   |  2 +-
>   lib/bpf/bpf_load.c      |  4 ++--
>   lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c  |  2 +-
>   7 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf.c b/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> index 1e1dd42a58..f218a8f2b0 100644
> --- a/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> @@ -31,14 +31,14 @@ rte_bpf_get_jit(const struct rte_bpf *bpf, struct rte_bpf_jit *jit)
>   }
>   
>   int
> -bpf_jit(struct rte_bpf *bpf)
> +rte_bpf_jit(struct rte_bpf *bpf)
>   {
>   	int32_t rc;
>   
>   #if defined(RTE_ARCH_X86_64)
> -	rc = bpf_jit_x86(bpf);
> +	rc = rte_bpf_jit_x86(bpf);
>   #elif defined(RTE_ARCH_ARM64)
> -	rc = bpf_jit_arm64(bpf);
> +	rc = rte_bpf_jit_arm64(bpf);
>   #else
>   	rc = -ENOTSUP;
>   #endif
> diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_convert.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_convert.c
> index 9563274c9c..d441be6663 100644
> --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_convert.c
> +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_convert.c
> @@ -23,11 +23,8 @@
>   #include <rte_malloc.h>
>   #include <rte_errno.h>
>   
> -/* Workaround name conflicts with libpcap */
> -#define bpf_validate(f, len) bpf_validate_libpcap(f, len)
>   #include <pcap/pcap.h>
>   #include <pcap/bpf.h>
> -#undef bpf_validate
>   
>   #include "bpf_impl.h"
>   #include "bpf_def.h"
> diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_impl.h b/lib/bpf/bpf_impl.h
> index b4d8e87c6d..e955b74181 100644
> --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_impl.h
> +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_impl.h
> @@ -17,12 +17,10 @@ struct rte_bpf {
>   	uint32_t stack_sz;
>   };
>   
> -extern int bpf_validate(struct rte_bpf *bpf);
> -
> -extern int bpf_jit(struct rte_bpf *bpf);
> -
> -extern int bpf_jit_x86(struct rte_bpf *);
> -extern int bpf_jit_arm64(struct rte_bpf *);
> +extern int rte_bpf_validate(struct rte_bpf *bpf);
> +extern int rte_bpf_jit(struct rte_bpf *bpf);
> +extern int rte_bpf_jit_x86(struct rte_bpf *bpf);
> +extern int rte_bpf_jit_arm64(struct rte_bpf *bpf);

I am still not quite ok to us 'rte_' prefix for internal library 
functions...
Might be at least '_rte_', or '_bpf_'?
Another ask - can you put comment here with advise for future
add-ons to avoid pure 'bpf_' prefix and why.
Konstantin


>   extern int rte_bpf_logtype;
>   
> diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_arm64.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_arm64.c
> index db79ff7385..d1ab5f8fbf 100644
> --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_arm64.c
> +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_arm64.c
> @@ -1393,7 +1393,7 @@ emit(struct a64_jit_ctx *ctx, struct rte_bpf *bpf)
>    * Produce a native ISA version of the given BPF code.
>    */
>   int
> -bpf_jit_arm64(struct rte_bpf *bpf)
> +rte_bpf_jit_arm64(struct rte_bpf *bpf)
>   {
>   	struct a64_jit_ctx ctx;
>   	size_t size;
> diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c
> index c1a30e0386..182004ac7d 100644
> --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c
> +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c
> @@ -1490,7 +1490,7 @@ emit(struct bpf_jit_state *st, const struct rte_bpf *bpf)
>    * produce a native ISA version of the given BPF code.
>    */
>   int
> -bpf_jit_x86(struct rte_bpf *bpf)
> +rte_bpf_jit_x86(struct rte_bpf *bpf)
>   {
>   	int32_t rc;
>   	uint32_t i;
> diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_load.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_load.c
> index 1e17df6ce0..2c4bca3586 100644
> --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_load.c
> +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_load.c
> @@ -108,9 +108,9 @@ rte_bpf_load(const struct rte_bpf_prm *prm)
>   		return NULL;
>   	}
>   
> -	rc = bpf_validate(bpf);
> +	rc = rte_bpf_validate(bpf);
>   	if (rc == 0) {
> -		bpf_jit(bpf);
> +		rte_bpf_jit(bpf);
>   		if (mprotect(bpf, bpf->sz, PROT_READ) != 0)
>   			rc = -ENOMEM;
>   	}
> diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c
> index 61cbb42216..2d3d899966 100644
> --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c
> +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c
> @@ -2302,7 +2302,7 @@ evaluate(struct bpf_verifier *bvf)
>   }
>   
>   int
> -bpf_validate(struct rte_bpf *bpf)
> +rte_bpf_validate(struct rte_bpf *bpf)
>   {
>   	int32_t rc;
>   	struct bpf_verifier bvf;