1=================================
2HOWTO interact with BPF subsystem
3=================================
4
5This document provides information for the BPF subsystem about various
6workflows related to reporting bugs, submitting patches, and queueing
7patches for stable kernels.
8
9For general information about submitting patches, please refer to
10`Documentation/process/`_. This document only describes additional specifics
11related to BPF.
12
13.. contents::
14    :local:
15    :depth: 2
16
17Reporting bugs
18==============
19
20Q: How do I report bugs for BPF kernel code?
21--------------------------------------------
22A: Since all BPF kernel development as well as bpftool and iproute2 BPF
23loader development happens through the bpf kernel mailing list,
24please report any found issues around BPF to the following mailing
25list:
26
27 bpf@vger.kernel.org
28
29This may also include issues related to XDP, BPF tracing, etc.
30
31Given netdev has a high volume of traffic, please also add the BPF
32maintainers to Cc (from kernel MAINTAINERS_ file):
33
34* Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
35* Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
36
37In case a buggy commit has already been identified, make sure to keep
38the actual commit authors in Cc as well for the report. They can
39typically be identified through the kernel's git tree.
40
41**Please do NOT report BPF issues to bugzilla.kernel.org since it
42is a guarantee that the reported issue will be overlooked.**
43
44Submitting patches
45==================
46
47Q: To which mailing list do I need to submit my BPF patches?
48------------------------------------------------------------
49A: Please submit your BPF patches to the bpf kernel mailing list:
50
51 bpf@vger.kernel.org
52
53In case your patch has changes in various different subsystems (e.g.
54networking, tracing, security, etc), make sure to Cc the related kernel mailing
55lists and maintainers from there as well, so they are able to review
56the changes and provide their Acked-by's to the patches.
57
58Q: Where can I find patches currently under discussion for BPF subsystem?
59-------------------------------------------------------------------------
60A: All patches that are Cc'ed to netdev are queued for review under netdev
61patchwork project:
62
63  https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/
64
65Those patches which target BPF, are assigned to a 'bpf' delegate for
66further processing from BPF maintainers. The current queue with
67patches under review can be found at:
68
69  https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?delegate=121173
70
71Once the patches have been reviewed by the BPF community as a whole
72and approved by the BPF maintainers, their status in patchwork will be
73changed to 'Accepted' and the submitter will be notified by mail. This
74means that the patches look good from a BPF perspective and have been
75applied to one of the two BPF kernel trees.
76
77In case feedback from the community requires a respin of the patches,
78their status in patchwork will be set to 'Changes Requested', and purged
79from the current review queue. Likewise for cases where patches would
80get rejected or are not applicable to the BPF trees (but assigned to
81the 'bpf' delegate).
82
83Q: How do the changes make their way into Linux?
84------------------------------------------------
85A: There are two BPF kernel trees (git repositories). Once patches have
86been accepted by the BPF maintainers, they will be applied to one
87of the two BPF trees:
88
89 * https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf.git/
90 * https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git/
91
92The bpf tree itself is for fixes only, whereas bpf-next for features,
93cleanups or other kind of improvements ("next-like" content). This is
94analogous to net and net-next trees for networking. Both bpf and
95bpf-next will only have a master branch in order to simplify against
96which branch patches should get rebased to.
97
98Accumulated BPF patches in the bpf tree will regularly get pulled
99into the net kernel tree. Likewise, accumulated BPF patches accepted
100into the bpf-next tree will make their way into net-next tree. net and
101net-next are both run by David S. Miller. From there, they will go
102into the kernel mainline tree run by Linus Torvalds. To read up on the
103process of net and net-next being merged into the mainline tree, see
104the :ref:`netdev-FAQ`
105
106
107
108Occasionally, to prevent merge conflicts, we might send pull requests
109to other trees (e.g. tracing) with a small subset of the patches, but
110net and net-next are always the main trees targeted for integration.
111
112The pull requests will contain a high-level summary of the accumulated
113patches and can be searched on netdev kernel mailing list through the
114following subject lines (``yyyy-mm-dd`` is the date of the pull
115request)::
116
117  pull-request: bpf yyyy-mm-dd
118  pull-request: bpf-next yyyy-mm-dd
119
120Q: How do I indicate which tree (bpf vs. bpf-next) my patch should be applied to?
121---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
122
123A: The process is the very same as described in the :ref:`netdev-FAQ`,
124so please read up on it. The subject line must indicate whether the
125patch is a fix or rather "next-like" content in order to let the
126maintainers know whether it is targeted at bpf or bpf-next.
127
128For fixes eventually landing in bpf -> net tree, the subject must
129look like::
130
131  git format-patch --subject-prefix='PATCH bpf' start..finish
132
133For features/improvements/etc that should eventually land in
134bpf-next -> net-next, the subject must look like::
135
136  git format-patch --subject-prefix='PATCH bpf-next' start..finish
137
138If unsure whether the patch or patch series should go into bpf
139or net directly, or bpf-next or net-next directly, it is not a
140problem either if the subject line says net or net-next as target.
141It is eventually up to the maintainers to do the delegation of
142the patches.
143
144If it is clear that patches should go into bpf or bpf-next tree,
145please make sure to rebase the patches against those trees in
146order to reduce potential conflicts.
147
148In case the patch or patch series has to be reworked and sent out
149again in a second or later revision, it is also required to add a
150version number (``v2``, ``v3``, ...) into the subject prefix::
151
152  git format-patch --subject-prefix='PATCH bpf-next v2' start..finish
153
154When changes have been requested to the patch series, always send the
155whole patch series again with the feedback incorporated (never send
156individual diffs on top of the old series).
157
158Q: What does it mean when a patch gets applied to bpf or bpf-next tree?
159-----------------------------------------------------------------------
160A: It means that the patch looks good for mainline inclusion from
161a BPF point of view.
162
163Be aware that this is not a final verdict that the patch will
164automatically get accepted into net or net-next trees eventually:
165
166On the bpf kernel mailing list reviews can come in at any point
167in time. If discussions around a patch conclude that they cannot
168get included as-is, we will either apply a follow-up fix or drop
169them from the trees entirely. Therefore, we also reserve to rebase
170the trees when deemed necessary. After all, the purpose of the tree
171is to:
172
173i) accumulate and stage BPF patches for integration into trees
174   like net and net-next, and
175
176ii) run extensive BPF test suite and
177    workloads on the patches before they make their way any further.
178
179Once the BPF pull request was accepted by David S. Miller, then
180the patches end up in net or net-next tree, respectively, and
181make their way from there further into mainline. Again, see the
182:ref:`netdev-FAQ` for additional information e.g. on how often they are
183merged to mainline.
184
185Q: How long do I need to wait for feedback on my BPF patches?
186-------------------------------------------------------------
187A: We try to keep the latency low. The usual time to feedback will
188be around 2 or 3 business days. It may vary depending on the
189complexity of changes and current patch load.
190
191Q: How often do you send pull requests to major kernel trees like net or net-next?
192----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
193
194A: Pull requests will be sent out rather often in order to not
195accumulate too many patches in bpf or bpf-next.
196
197As a rule of thumb, expect pull requests for each tree regularly
198at the end of the week. In some cases pull requests could additionally
199come also in the middle of the week depending on the current patch
200load or urgency.
201
202Q: Are patches applied to bpf-next when the merge window is open?
203-----------------------------------------------------------------
204A: For the time when the merge window is open, bpf-next will not be
205processed. This is roughly analogous to net-next patch processing,
206so feel free to read up on the :ref:`netdev-FAQ` about further details.
207
208During those two weeks of merge window, we might ask you to resend
209your patch series once bpf-next is open again. Once Linus released
210a ``v*-rc1`` after the merge window, we continue processing of bpf-next.
211
212For non-subscribers to kernel mailing lists, there is also a status
213page run by David S. Miller on net-next that provides guidance:
214
215  http://vger.kernel.org/~davem/net-next.html
216
217Q: Verifier changes and test cases
218----------------------------------
219Q: I made a BPF verifier change, do I need to add test cases for
220BPF kernel selftests_?
221
222A: If the patch has changes to the behavior of the verifier, then yes,
223it is absolutely necessary to add test cases to the BPF kernel
224selftests_ suite. If they are not present and we think they are
225needed, then we might ask for them before accepting any changes.
226
227In particular, test_verifier.c is tracking a high number of BPF test
228cases, including a lot of corner cases that LLVM BPF back end may
229generate out of the restricted C code. Thus, adding test cases is
230absolutely crucial to make sure future changes do not accidentally
231affect prior use-cases. Thus, treat those test cases as: verifier
232behavior that is not tracked in test_verifier.c could potentially
233be subject to change.
234
235Q: samples/bpf preference vs selftests?
236---------------------------------------
237Q: When should I add code to `samples/bpf/`_ and when to BPF kernel
238selftests_ ?
239
240A: In general, we prefer additions to BPF kernel selftests_ rather than
241`samples/bpf/`_. The rationale is very simple: kernel selftests are
242regularly run by various bots to test for kernel regressions.
243
244The more test cases we add to BPF selftests, the better the coverage
245and the less likely it is that those could accidentally break. It is
246not that BPF kernel selftests cannot demo how a specific feature can
247be used.
248
249That said, `samples/bpf/`_ may be a good place for people to get started,
250so it might be advisable that simple demos of features could go into
251`samples/bpf/`_, but advanced functional and corner-case testing rather
252into kernel selftests.
253
254If your sample looks like a test case, then go for BPF kernel selftests
255instead!
256
257Q: When should I add code to the bpftool?
258-----------------------------------------
259A: The main purpose of bpftool (under tools/bpf/bpftool/) is to provide
260a central user space tool for debugging and introspection of BPF programs
261and maps that are active in the kernel. If UAPI changes related to BPF
262enable for dumping additional information of programs or maps, then
263bpftool should be extended as well to support dumping them.
264
265Q: When should I add code to iproute2's BPF loader?
266---------------------------------------------------
267A: For UAPI changes related to the XDP or tc layer (e.g. ``cls_bpf``),
268the convention is that those control-path related changes are added to
269iproute2's BPF loader as well from user space side. This is not only
270useful to have UAPI changes properly designed to be usable, but also
271to make those changes available to a wider user base of major
272downstream distributions.
273
274Q: Do you accept patches as well for iproute2's BPF loader?
275-----------------------------------------------------------
276A: Patches for the iproute2's BPF loader have to be sent to:
277
278  netdev@vger.kernel.org
279
280While those patches are not processed by the BPF kernel maintainers,
281please keep them in Cc as well, so they can be reviewed.
282
283The official git repository for iproute2 is run by Stephen Hemminger
284and can be found at:
285
286  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shemminger/iproute2.git/
287
288The patches need to have a subject prefix of '``[PATCH iproute2
289master]``' or '``[PATCH iproute2 net-next]``'. '``master``' or
290'``net-next``' describes the target branch where the patch should be
291applied to. Meaning, if kernel changes went into the net-next kernel
292tree, then the related iproute2 changes need to go into the iproute2
293net-next branch, otherwise they can be targeted at master branch. The
294iproute2 net-next branch will get merged into the master branch after
295the current iproute2 version from master has been released.
296
297Like BPF, the patches end up in patchwork under the netdev project and
298are delegated to 'shemminger' for further processing:
299
300  http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/list/?delegate=389
301
302Q: What is the minimum requirement before I submit my BPF patches?
303------------------------------------------------------------------
304A: When submitting patches, always take the time and properly test your
305patches *prior* to submission. Never rush them! If maintainers find
306that your patches have not been properly tested, it is a good way to
307get them grumpy. Testing patch submissions is a hard requirement!
308
309Note, fixes that go to bpf tree *must* have a ``Fixes:`` tag included.
310The same applies to fixes that target bpf-next, where the affected
311commit is in net-next (or in some cases bpf-next). The ``Fixes:`` tag is
312crucial in order to identify follow-up commits and tremendously helps
313for people having to do backporting, so it is a must have!
314
315We also don't accept patches with an empty commit message. Take your
316time and properly write up a high quality commit message, it is
317essential!
318
319Think about it this way: other developers looking at your code a month
320from now need to understand *why* a certain change has been done that
321way, and whether there have been flaws in the analysis or assumptions
322that the original author did. Thus providing a proper rationale and
323describing the use-case for the changes is a must.
324
325Patch submissions with >1 patch must have a cover letter which includes
326a high level description of the series. This high level summary will
327then be placed into the merge commit by the BPF maintainers such that
328it is also accessible from the git log for future reference.
329
330Q: Features changing BPF JIT and/or LLVM
331----------------------------------------
332Q: What do I need to consider when adding a new instruction or feature
333that would require BPF JIT and/or LLVM integration as well?
334
335A: We try hard to keep all BPF JITs up to date such that the same user
336experience can be guaranteed when running BPF programs on different
337architectures without having the program punt to the less efficient
338interpreter in case the in-kernel BPF JIT is enabled.
339
340If you are unable to implement or test the required JIT changes for
341certain architectures, please work together with the related BPF JIT
342developers in order to get the feature implemented in a timely manner.
343Please refer to the git log (``arch/*/net/``) to locate the necessary
344people for helping out.
345
346Also always make sure to add BPF test cases (e.g. test_bpf.c and
347test_verifier.c) for new instructions, so that they can receive
348broad test coverage and help run-time testing the various BPF JITs.
349
350In case of new BPF instructions, once the changes have been accepted
351into the Linux kernel, please implement support into LLVM's BPF back
352end. See LLVM_ section below for further information.
353
354Stable submission
355=================
356
357Q: I need a specific BPF commit in stable kernels. What should I do?
358--------------------------------------------------------------------
359A: In case you need a specific fix in stable kernels, first check whether
360the commit has already been applied in the related ``linux-*.y`` branches:
361
362  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/
363
364If not the case, then drop an email to the BPF maintainers with the
365netdev kernel mailing list in Cc and ask for the fix to be queued up:
366
367  netdev@vger.kernel.org
368
369The process in general is the same as on netdev itself, see also the
370:ref:`netdev-FAQ`.
371
372Q: Do you also backport to kernels not currently maintained as stable?
373----------------------------------------------------------------------
374A: No. If you need a specific BPF commit in kernels that are currently not
375maintained by the stable maintainers, then you are on your own.
376
377The current stable and longterm stable kernels are all listed here:
378
379  https://www.kernel.org/
380
381Q: The BPF patch I am about to submit needs to go to stable as well
382-------------------------------------------------------------------
383What should I do?
384
385A: The same rules apply as with netdev patch submissions in general, see
386the :ref:`netdev-FAQ`.
387
388Never add "``Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org``" to the patch description, but
389ask the BPF maintainers to queue the patches instead. This can be done
390with a note, for example, under the ``---`` part of the patch which does
391not go into the git log. Alternatively, this can be done as a simple
392request by mail instead.
393
394Q: Queue stable patches
395-----------------------
396Q: Where do I find currently queued BPF patches that will be submitted
397to stable?
398
399A: Once patches that fix critical bugs got applied into the bpf tree, they
400are queued up for stable submission under:
401
402  http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/bundle/bpf/stable/?state=*
403
404They will be on hold there at minimum until the related commit made its
405way into the mainline kernel tree.
406
407After having been under broader exposure, the queued patches will be
408submitted by the BPF maintainers to the stable maintainers.
409
410Testing patches
411===============
412
413Q: How to run BPF selftests
414---------------------------
415A: After you have booted into the newly compiled kernel, navigate to
416the BPF selftests_ suite in order to test BPF functionality (current
417working directory points to the root of the cloned git tree)::
418
419  $ cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/
420  $ make
421
422To run the verifier tests::
423
424  $ sudo ./test_verifier
425
426The verifier tests print out all the current checks being
427performed. The summary at the end of running all tests will dump
428information of test successes and failures::
429
430  Summary: 418 PASSED, 0 FAILED
431
432In order to run through all BPF selftests, the following command is
433needed::
434
435  $ sudo make run_tests
436
437See the kernels selftest `Documentation/dev-tools/kselftest.rst`_
438document for further documentation.
439
440To maximize the number of tests passing, the .config of the kernel
441under test should match the config file fragment in
442tools/testing/selftests/bpf as closely as possible.
443
444Finally to ensure support for latest BPF Type Format features -
445discussed in `Documentation/bpf/btf.rst`_ - pahole version 1.16
446is required for kernels built with CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF=y.
447pahole is delivered in the dwarves package or can be built
448from source at
449
450https://github.com/acmel/dwarves
451
452Some distros have pahole version 1.16 packaged already, e.g.
453Fedora, Gentoo.
454
455Q: Which BPF kernel selftests version should I run my kernel against?
456---------------------------------------------------------------------
457A: If you run a kernel ``xyz``, then always run the BPF kernel selftests
458from that kernel ``xyz`` as well. Do not expect that the BPF selftest
459from the latest mainline tree will pass all the time.
460
461In particular, test_bpf.c and test_verifier.c have a large number of
462test cases and are constantly updated with new BPF test sequences, or
463existing ones are adapted to verifier changes e.g. due to verifier
464becoming smarter and being able to better track certain things.
465
466LLVM
467====
468
469Q: Where do I find LLVM with BPF support?
470-----------------------------------------
471A: The BPF back end for LLVM is upstream in LLVM since version 3.7.1.
472
473All major distributions these days ship LLVM with BPF back end enabled,
474so for the majority of use-cases it is not required to compile LLVM by
475hand anymore, just install the distribution provided package.
476
477LLVM's static compiler lists the supported targets through
478``llc --version``, make sure BPF targets are listed. Example::
479
480     $ llc --version
481     LLVM (http://llvm.org/):
482       LLVM version 10.0.0
483       Optimized build.
484       Default target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
485       Host CPU: skylake
486
487       Registered Targets:
488         aarch64    - AArch64 (little endian)
489         bpf        - BPF (host endian)
490         bpfeb      - BPF (big endian)
491         bpfel      - BPF (little endian)
492         x86        - 32-bit X86: Pentium-Pro and above
493         x86-64     - 64-bit X86: EM64T and AMD64
494
495For developers in order to utilize the latest features added to LLVM's
496BPF back end, it is advisable to run the latest LLVM releases. Support
497for new BPF kernel features such as additions to the BPF instruction
498set are often developed together.
499
500All LLVM releases can be found at: http://releases.llvm.org/
501
502Q: Got it, so how do I build LLVM manually anyway?
503--------------------------------------------------
504A: We recommend that developers who want the fastest incremental builds
505use the Ninja build system, you can find it in your system's package
506manager, usually the package is ninja or ninja-build.
507
508You need ninja, cmake and gcc-c++ as build requisites for LLVM. Once you
509have that set up, proceed with building the latest LLVM and clang version
510from the git repositories::
511
512     $ git clone https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project.git
513     $ mkdir -p llvm-project/llvm/build
514     $ cd llvm-project/llvm/build
515     $ cmake .. -G "Ninja" -DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD="BPF;X86" \
516                -DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS="clang"    \
517                -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release        \
518                -DLLVM_BUILD_RUNTIME=OFF
519     $ ninja
520
521The built binaries can then be found in the build/bin/ directory, where
522you can point the PATH variable to.
523
524Set ``-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD`` equal to the target you wish to build, you
525will find a full list of targets within the llvm-project/llvm/lib/Target
526directory.
527
528Q: Reporting LLVM BPF issues
529----------------------------
530Q: Should I notify BPF kernel maintainers about issues in LLVM's BPF code
531generation back end or about LLVM generated code that the verifier
532refuses to accept?
533
534A: Yes, please do!
535
536LLVM's BPF back end is a key piece of the whole BPF
537infrastructure and it ties deeply into verification of programs from the
538kernel side. Therefore, any issues on either side need to be investigated
539and fixed whenever necessary.
540
541Therefore, please make sure to bring them up at netdev kernel mailing
542list and Cc BPF maintainers for LLVM and kernel bits:
543
544* Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
545* Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
546* Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
547
548LLVM also has an issue tracker where BPF related bugs can be found:
549
550  https://bugs.llvm.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bpf
551
552However, it is better to reach out through mailing lists with having
553maintainers in Cc.
554
555Q: New BPF instruction for kernel and LLVM
556------------------------------------------
557Q: I have added a new BPF instruction to the kernel, how can I integrate
558it into LLVM?
559
560A: LLVM has a ``-mcpu`` selector for the BPF back end in order to allow
561the selection of BPF instruction set extensions. By default the
562``generic`` processor target is used, which is the base instruction set
563(v1) of BPF.
564
565LLVM has an option to select ``-mcpu=probe`` where it will probe the host
566kernel for supported BPF instruction set extensions and selects the
567optimal set automatically.
568
569For cross-compilation, a specific version can be select manually as well ::
570
571     $ llc -march bpf -mcpu=help
572     Available CPUs for this target:
573
574       generic - Select the generic processor.
575       probe   - Select the probe processor.
576       v1      - Select the v1 processor.
577       v2      - Select the v2 processor.
578     [...]
579
580Newly added BPF instructions to the Linux kernel need to follow the same
581scheme, bump the instruction set version and implement probing for the
582extensions such that ``-mcpu=probe`` users can benefit from the
583optimization transparently when upgrading their kernels.
584
585If you are unable to implement support for the newly added BPF instruction
586please reach out to BPF developers for help.
587
588By the way, the BPF kernel selftests run with ``-mcpu=probe`` for better
589test coverage.
590
591Q: clang flag for target bpf?
592-----------------------------
593Q: In some cases clang flag ``-target bpf`` is used but in other cases the
594default clang target, which matches the underlying architecture, is used.
595What is the difference and when I should use which?
596
597A: Although LLVM IR generation and optimization try to stay architecture
598independent, ``-target <arch>`` still has some impact on generated code:
599
600- BPF program may recursively include header file(s) with file scope
601  inline assembly codes. The default target can handle this well,
602  while ``bpf`` target may fail if bpf backend assembler does not
603  understand these assembly codes, which is true in most cases.
604
605- When compiled without ``-g``, additional elf sections, e.g.,
606  .eh_frame and .rela.eh_frame, may be present in the object file
607  with default target, but not with ``bpf`` target.
608
609- The default target may turn a C switch statement into a switch table
610  lookup and jump operation. Since the switch table is placed
611  in the global readonly section, the bpf program will fail to load.
612  The bpf target does not support switch table optimization.
613  The clang option ``-fno-jump-tables`` can be used to disable
614  switch table generation.
615
616- For clang ``-target bpf``, it is guaranteed that pointer or long /
617  unsigned long types will always have a width of 64 bit, no matter
618  whether underlying clang binary or default target (or kernel) is
619  32 bit. However, when native clang target is used, then it will
620  compile these types based on the underlying architecture's conventions,
621  meaning in case of 32 bit architecture, pointer or long / unsigned
622  long types e.g. in BPF context structure will have width of 32 bit
623  while the BPF LLVM back end still operates in 64 bit. The native
624  target is mostly needed in tracing for the case of walking ``pt_regs``
625  or other kernel structures where CPU's register width matters.
626  Otherwise, ``clang -target bpf`` is generally recommended.
627
628You should use default target when:
629
630- Your program includes a header file, e.g., ptrace.h, which eventually
631  pulls in some header files containing file scope host assembly codes.
632
633- You can add ``-fno-jump-tables`` to work around the switch table issue.
634
635Otherwise, you can use ``bpf`` target. Additionally, you *must* use bpf target
636when:
637
638- Your program uses data structures with pointer or long / unsigned long
639  types that interface with BPF helpers or context data structures. Access
640  into these structures is verified by the BPF verifier and may result
641  in verification failures if the native architecture is not aligned with
642  the BPF architecture, e.g. 64-bit. An example of this is
643  BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_MSG require ``-target bpf``
644
645
646.. Links
647.. _Documentation/process/: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/
648.. _MAINTAINERS: ../../MAINTAINERS
649.. _netdev-FAQ: ../networking/netdev-FAQ.rst
650.. _samples/bpf/: ../../samples/bpf/
651.. _selftests: ../../tools/testing/selftests/bpf/
652.. _Documentation/dev-tools/kselftest.rst:
653   https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/kselftest.html
654.. _Documentation/bpf/btf.rst: btf.rst
655
656Happy BPF hacking!
657