Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Convert capable.py to CO-RE #3853

Closed
eiffel-fl opened this issue Feb 17, 2022 · 6 comments
Closed

Convert capable.py to CO-RE #3853

eiffel-fl opened this issue Feb 17, 2022 · 6 comments

Comments

@eiffel-fl
Copy link
Contributor

eiffel-fl commented Feb 17, 2022

Hi.

The tools to get capabilities used does not exist to CO-RE.
I will try to translate it (I cannot self-assigned this issue and I just open it to inform people I will try it so we do not end with several people trying to convert it at the same time).

Best regards.

@eiffel-fl
Copy link
Contributor Author

I thought I would be able to start today but it will delayed until tomorrow or beginning of next week I think.

@KentaTada
Copy link
Contributor

@eiffel-fl
Thank you for the review in #3890
We are also trying to convert python-based tools to libbpf tools.
Especially, we want to use libbpf-tools on aarm64.

and so on.

Currently, we are summarizing the comparison table between python-based tools to libbpf tools.
When we prepare for that, we will share it in the another issue.

Thanks!

@eiffel-fl
Copy link
Contributor Author

eiffel-fl commented Mar 8, 2022

Hi.

You are welcome and sorry for it, I planned to convert this gadget but I lacked time when I opened the issue.
Anyway, the important thing is that this tool is converted.

I think I will also to work on arm64, for the moment I was using bcc tools for this architecture and I had no problem.
But when I quickly tested CO-RE ones I got some troubles (I did not investigate about it).
I will let you know when I work on it but I cannot say you when it will occur.

Best regards.

@mauriciovasquezbernal
Copy link
Contributor

@KentaTada perhaps you want to take a look at #3889.

@KentaTada
Copy link
Contributor

@mauriciovasquezbernal
Thanks.
As feasibility study, we are trying to deploy the container including libbpf-based tools with the reduced BTF files on the environment which does not support BTF to reduce the runtime overhead.
I'll take a look at #3889 at first.

@eiffel-fl
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing as done in #3890!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants