From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 264DFA2F18 for ; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 14:51:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3A821C0B1; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 14:51:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41D1C1C0AB for ; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 14:51:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BBEC217FC; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 08:51:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 03 Oct 2019 08:51:36 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=Hhb9T82cLOM46XYtSFXU7YCXmJm6MlSVReaEn4AIL+Y=; b=OBdI4NoxJg3/ 7O4RNCTfLLhKZTo4fjyZOJFGNUsZV4nCEEk2ITkBHPzGhMR0Bbiw4djR4ZQv0mYY UW253Vnt3oBF54XRxrewxl9UE4fT6G/zFOIMRfLL5PQ14MPx1iQRSBUry06iF4Hs Qx2toZ9arHCuzBX0uyWvxl/p4lj9Zj0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=Hhb9T82cLOM46XYtSFXU7YCXmJm6MlSVReaEn4AIL +Y=; b=0XkduqoAS958yPzFYCSRyOVtouDaLF9a+9t4aG/G7ie5NBJOJhOITFwrD Kezc1UGjVifQY0+eDRj50tyzk1/2RIG93n8fFM2ym7QiEBPmzDtJRcbtBbw0DAdm irWuNt/geV3Ocq1DNr35Tb4lb4ZyY1r2GuHGAM1hgwfIsMdNFSq5RxYflKelqInq A+D4wwMCkyzZ+O9JHv/4A5aSjgcoWzKlNw4ekZclS7XebB982BAQdmVjmylgVX1U 21ktxWHoRuWybfbxGoWltPEVv8OyMGVSAgHnNKD8WZBAmRfFnEqFutLyfO1K1YxP lNaS9tz0RpGWSpbZAdRA5nEeUO6yw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrgeekgdehlecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertd dttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgrshcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehm ohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucfrrg hrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucev lhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 47E5BD60062; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 08:51:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: jerinj@marvell.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com Cc: dev@dpdk.org, honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com, gavin.hu@arm.com Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:51:33 +0200 Message-ID: <1795075.Xzk8EHHx5G@xps> In-Reply-To: <20190903105938.33231-1-jerinj@marvell.com> References: <20190903105938.33231-1-jerinj@marvell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/8] eBPF arm64 JIT support X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 03/09/2019 12:59, jerinj@marvell.com: > Added eBPF arm64 JIT support to improve the eBPF program performance > on arm64. > > lib/librte_bpf/bpf_jit_arm64.c | 1451 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ I am concerned about duplicating the BPF JIT effort in DPDK and Linux. Could we try to pull the Linux JIT? Is the license the only issue? After a quick discussion, it seems the Linux authors are OK to arrange their JIT code for sharing with userspace projects.