feat: Add set for Array<T>

[fslongjin]

Add set() function for Array<T>

---

This change is 

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for aya-rs-docs ready!

Built without sensitive environment variables

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	3decd82
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/aya-rs-docs/deploys/67c616c5fdab580008681e4b
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-1005--aya-rs-docs.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[fslongjin]

ping

[tamird]

ping

Needs tests.

[vadorovsky]

To be precise - a great place to add tests would be https://github.com/aya-rs/aya/blob/main/test/integration-ebpf/src/map_test.rs

A simple set call on any kind of map with some dummy values would be enough 🙂

[fslongjin]

Ok, I'll add tests tomorrow

[fslongjin]

To be precise - a great place to add tests would be https://github.com/aya-rs/aya/blob/main/test/integration-ebpf/src/map_test.rs

A simple set call on any kind of map with some dummy values would be enough 🙂

I've already added a test and rebased the branch to the latest version. Could you please review it? Thank you!

[tamird]

Reviewed 1 of 3 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 1 of 3 files reviewed, 4 unresolved discussions (waiting on @fslongjin)

---

ebpf/aya-ebpf/src/maps/array.rs line 8 at r1 (raw file):

use crate::{
    bindings::{bpf_map_def, bpf_map_type::BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY},
    helpers::bpf_map_lookup_elem,

can you put bpf_map_update_elem here?

---

ebpf/aya-ebpf/src/maps/array.rs line 78 at r1 (raw file):

    /// Sets the value of the element at the given index.
    pub fn set(&self, index: u32, value: &T, flags: u64) -> Result<(), c_long> {
        insert(self.def.get(), &index, value, flags)

lookup above is unsafe, why is this one safe? why do we need the insert helper?

---

ebpf/aya-ebpf/src/maps/array.rs line 92 at r1 (raw file):

        )
    };
    (ret == 0).then_some(()).ok_or(ret)

why are we making an option only to turn it into a result?

    match unsafe {
        bpf_map_update_elem(
            def as *mut _,
            key as *const _ as *const _,
            value as *const _ as *const _,
            flags,
        )
    } {
        0 => Ok(())
        ret => Err(ret),
    }

Code quote:

    let ret = unsafe {
        bpf_map_update_elem(
            def as *mut _,
            key as *const _ as *const _,
            value as *const _ as *const _,
            flags,
        )
    };
    (ret == 0).then_some(()).ok_or(ret)

---

test/integration-test/src/tests/smoke.rs line 74 at r1 (raw file):

#[test]
fn map_set() {

i don't think this is an appropriate place for this test. this file is called "smoke" because it is testing only loading and attaching programs, and what you're doing here is different. please have a look at the other tests that do more sophisticated things.

[tamird]

@fslongjin are you planning to work on this?

[tamird]

Now that this is basically a 1-liner, I think we can forgo the tests.

Reviewable status: 0 of 12 files reviewed, all discussions resolved

---

ebpf/aya-ebpf/src/maps/array.rs line 8 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, tamird (Tamir Duberstein) wrote…

can you put bpf_map_update_elem here?

Done.

[tamird]

Reviewed 9 of 12 files at r2, 2 of 3 files at r3, 2 of 2 files at r5, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @vadorovsky)