@@ -226,6 +226,6 @@ static const struct btf_kfunc_id_set bpf_map_iter_kfunc_set = {
static int init_subsystem(void)
{
- return register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING, &bpf_map_iter_kfunc_set);
+ return register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_UNSPEC, &bpf_map_iter_kfunc_set);
}
late_initcall(init_subsystem);
@@ -103,6 +103,8 @@ struct {
__type(value, __u32);
} m_hash SEC(".maps");
+__s64 bpf_map_sum_elem_count(struct bpf_map *map) __ksym;
+
static inline int check_hash(void)
{
struct bpf_htab *hash = (struct bpf_htab *)&m_hash;
@@ -115,6 +117,8 @@ static inline int check_hash(void)
VERIFY(hash->elem_size == 64);
VERIFY(hash->count.counter == 0);
+ VERIFY(bpf_map_sum_elem_count(map) == 0);
+
for (i = 0; i < HALF_ENTRIES; ++i) {
const __u32 key = i;
const __u32 val = 1;
@@ -123,6 +127,7 @@ static inline int check_hash(void)
return 0;
}
VERIFY(hash->count.counter == HALF_ENTRIES);
+ VERIFY(bpf_map_sum_elem_count(map) == HALF_ENTRIES);
return 1;
}
Register the bpf_map_sum_elem_count func for all programs, and update the map_ptr subtest of the test_progs test to test the new functionality. The usage is allowed as long as the pointer to the map is trusted (when using tracing programs) or is a const pointer to map, as in the following example: struct { __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_HASH); ... } hash SEC(".maps"); ... static inline int some_bpf_prog(void) { struct bpf_map *map = (struct bpf_map *)&hash; __s64 count; count = bpf_map_sum_elem_count(map); ... } Signed-off-by: Anton Protopopov <aspsk@isovalent.com> --- kernel/bpf/map_iter.c | 2 +- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/map_ptr_kern.c | 5 +++++ 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)