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 E2498A2EEB for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 22:15:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F4C01C02F; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 22:15:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10D5B1C01F for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 22:15:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 703262129D; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 16:15:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 07 Oct 2019 16:15:18 -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=jRHcL2DH4eRvcykO+WvPIbEU+kyng5PUpSa/1c+Ll8I=; b=EsflhYgUd9d8 AJOi48URl26VJCBxQkedv1cRh2gEcWyLJ5MIFxguDCcE46FYqZe8ByywTc0GIFQU Y39M5E2S2xLZdO/E7jldzEffymWtg7Snf8rvAqCd8YL8+voxouAvl010MNqxTy2q ypJuh+i+VY+c1AL/9T1NFrl1JbOfo4w= 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=fm1; bh=jRHcL2DH4eRvcykO+WvPIbEU+kyng5PUpSa/1c+Ll 8I=; b=ui8Pxyx8M8JcV7drkH9UZX4qRoti35tWIun3bCYsr44wnW9GyrRiIuaIO VU8D0IZcbSTtV68CwpxKQn1RFDsN9UfvOFue8bHBELt0cP6VQ55IIOOJxK8qCgXK CzUATWx86itMKvU/Z5913J8LQzPHQg7IjIGz3YqcIglwvQ2KN4ZCRj4OebwVgbKB kbowqAWpJEfdg6YuIKzZretls33GSfzgMqpNxTL2cPL8oKxF3arm9yWeyJ2MmSq2 Ou/9XiVSzBk3XimRXIEjM/PBfVuXKhG9XxnpjjugUThwxizio9mJ3aWIt2agJBmU XMcLvR5lgoNgDi/yO9U/gT4gdwCNA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrheejgddufeegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhh ohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt 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 00178D60057; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 16:15:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Jerin Jacob Cc: "Ananyev, Konstantin" , Jerin Jacob , dpdk-dev , Honnappa Nagarahalli , Gavin Hu Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 22:15:15 +0200 Message-ID: <4393352.hqBF0BEQvh@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20190903105938.33231-1-jerinj@marvell.com> <2692726.gUGBZ5dN0q@xps> 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" 07/10/2019 21:29, Jerin Jacob: > On Mon, 7 Oct, 2019, 11:35 PM Thomas Monjalon, wrote: [...] > let's restart from the beginning by answering simple questions: > > - what are the use cases of BPF in DPDK? > > If something needs to be dynamically controlled then eBPF can be used, > couple of use cases > > # packet filtering > # debugging > # function call tracing > # There are some Lua JIT based dataplane implementations. Which can be > replaced with eBPF with JIT. > > - how much we'll benefit from sharing code with Linux? > > I have mentioned some of the performance constraint in the other thread. > Moreover I don't believe it is not easy task for Linux eBPF to run as > userspace and I not sure who is going to do that I was asking the benefits here: - sharing optimizations in both projects - get verifier support What else? > - what can we lose in a single JIT implementation? > > Sorry, I didn't understood this question? I mean what are the drawbacks of using a Linux implementation? How performance constraints are differents, etc? Note: as a lot of people, I don't really know BPF, so these are real questions to help understanding the challenge.