Date
1 - 5 of 5
Plans for libbpf packaging for distros?
|
Hi Jakub, Laura and Jiri Olsa (Cc others),
Subj: iovisor-dev] minutes: IO Visor TSC/Dev Meeting (To: iovisor-dev <iovisor-dev@...>) On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:30:25 -0700 "Brenden Blanco" <bblanco@...> wrote: Jakub:I noticed from the iovisor-dev minutes that you have plans for packaging libbpf from the kernel tree. And via that I noticed the github repo https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf, created by Yonghong Song. I'm uncertain if it makes sense to maintain this library outside the kernel git tree?!? To be honest, I have very little knowledge about building RPMs and other packages formats. I just wanted to point out that RHEL and Fedora is now shipping bpftool, which also part of kernel git tree. (Now I need input from Jiri Olsa and Laura to correct below statements:) AFAIK bpftool RPM-package[1] is part of the "Source Package" kernel-tools, which AFAIK gets build directly from the distro kernel git tree via kernel.spec file. This also happens for perf RPM-package[2] see section "Source Package" also point to kernel-tools. So, my question is, can we ship/package libbpf in the same way? Notice, that an increasing number of tools are linking/using libbpf, e.g. perf, bpftool, Suricata, (selftests and samples/bpf). [1] https://fedora.pkgs.org/28/fedora-x86_64/bpftool-4.16.0-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm.html [2] https://fedora.pkgs.org/29/fedora-x86_64/perf-4.18.10-300.fc29.x86_64.rpm.html -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer |
|
|
|
On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 12:37:06 -0200
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...> wrote: Em Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 02:37:54PM +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer escreveu:And you basically also ship a version of libbpf in this tarball:Hi Jakub, Laura and Jiri Olsa (Cc others),To ease access to the latest perf sources, we'll be making available $ tar tvf ~/download/perf-4.19.0.tar.xz | grep lib/bpf drwxrwxr-x root/root 0 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/ -rw-rw-r-- root/root 37 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/.gitignore -rw-rw-r-- root/root 69 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/Build -rw-rw-r-- root/root 6457 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/Makefile -rw-rw-r-- root/root 16456 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c -rw-rw-r-- root/root 4440 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h -rw-rw-r-- root/root 7897 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/btf.c -rw-rw-r-- root/root 775 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/btf.h -rw-rw-r-- root/root 56905 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c -rw-rw-r-- root/root 10683 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h -rw-rw-r-- root/root 2380 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_errno.c -rw-rw-r-- root/root 4483 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/nlattr.c -rw-rw-r-- root/root 1825 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/nlattr.h -rw-rw-r-- root/root 479 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/str_error.c -rw-rw-r-- root/root 152 2018-10-22 16:39 perf-4.19.0/tools/lib/bpf/str_error.h Which gets compiled to libbpf.a and statically linked with perf. Development continues in the kernel git tree, of course, and there-- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer |
|
|
|
Jakub Kicinski
On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 14:37:54 +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
Hi Jakub, Laura and Jiri Olsa (Cc others),To my understanding it's useful in two ways: - some less fortunate distros (Debian) reportedly need a kernel build to package bpftool, and for libbpf the same would have to happen. At least that's what I'm told. So separate repo helps there a lot; - we actually use the separate git repo as a submodule in our projects (https://github.com/Netronome/bpf-samples will migrate there really soon, just finishing code review). So for us the git submodule thing works quite well until distros package libbpf :) To be honest, I have very little knowledge about building RPMs andWe were planning to do the same thing for libbpf. Let me copy paste the patch to the package: Add libbpf to kernel tools development libs. This library contains functionality for loading and managing eBPF programs. Signed-off-by: David Beckett <david.beckett@...> --- kernel-tools.spec | 11 +++++++++++ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) diff --git a/kernel-tools.spec b/kernel-tools.spec index 44d29ba..cf2f7a0 100644 --- a/kernel-tools.spec +++ b/kernel-tools.spec @@ -261,6 +261,9 @@ popd pushd tools/gpio/ make popd +pushd tools/lib/bpf +make +popd pushd tools/bpf/bpftool make popd @@ -347,6 +350,9 @@ popd pushd tools/kvm/kvm_stat make INSTALL_ROOT=%{buildroot} install-tools popd +pushd tools/lib/bpf +make DESTDIR=%{buildroot} prefix=%{_prefix} install install_headers +popd pushd tools/bpf/bpftool make DESTDIR=%{buildroot} prefix=%{_prefix} bash_compdir=%{_sysconfdir}/bash_completion.d/ mandir=%{_mandir} install doc-install popd @@ -420,8 +426,13 @@ popd %files -n kernel-tools-libs-devel %{_libdir}/libcpupower.so +%{_libdir}/libbpf.a +%{_libdir}/libbpf.so %{_includedir}/cpufreq.h %{_includedir}/cpuidle.h +%{_includedir}/bpf/bpf.h +%{_includedir}/bpf/btf.h +%{_includedir}/bpf/libbpf.h %files -n bpftool %{_sbindir}/bpftool Fairly trivial patch, but since we learnt about the separate repo we are migrating our internal projects and tests to that, then Alexei suggested we need to add proper versioning to libbpf, and when all that is done we can come back to packaging. |
|
|
|
Alexei Starovoitov
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 11:51:22AM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote:
On 11/8/18 7:48 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:I think we're all on the same page.On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 14:37:54 +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:Yes, this looks almost exactly like what I would expect to packageHi Jakub, Laura and Jiri Olsa (Cc others),To my understanding it's useful in two ways: Just to reiterate few points: The source of truth of libbpf is in the kernel tree. github/libbpf is a mirror of kernel sources plus few headers that neceesary for the build. Currently we don't have the mirror automated, but the plan is to pull from the kernel tree continuously. .spec files can live in github too, and packages can be built out of it. When we were talking to distor folks they suggested to make sure that libbpf.SO have versioned symbols from day one. As far as I know that's the only thing blocking creation of official libbpf package. |
|
|
|
On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 07:48:39 -0800
Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...> wrote: - we actually use the separate git repo as a submodule in our projectsThat is an interesting use case. I myself is also guilty[1] of copying the libbpf code from the kernel and placing it on github to make my bpf-sample code work. I might take the same approach of a git submodule... until distros package libbpf. Notice my own disclaimer: [1] https://github.com/netoptimizer/prototype-kernel/tree/master/kernel/samples/bpf/tools -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer |
|
|