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 39E0CA2F67 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 17:39:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7EA41C235; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 17:39:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-io1-f68.google.com (mail-io1-f68.google.com [209.85.166.68]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 563631C231 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 17:39:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-io1-f68.google.com with SMTP id b136so14506639iof.3 for ; Fri, 04 Oct 2019 08:39:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=pqx5ElE73dm/S04q37hWD2sxsJ5GUhrgIeEeP8gVKSc=; b=odk4qyxF5jGeAdU/5LHpSxeGy01sXudsMvrHTocFag/svp3g0qxO+mptMofCJN8Ozw 5L/F1eKOaXQI7czV+Pi/Gkf2PVWRnH2pchm/BM9+EWxUQHTC/W0enV6BwHTPKZfVYNAj IJCzm9gss3+c0Zj0kpnwi5CtsX5jCEsKeBuB6kE6h+HpLSF5Qo0yXBFbt/2KIoHDJgSR oky7sQt/jEJqypbVuQI094F+PtoSvSRakRpHV1MWhqB7n/c3MSIXM7mR4Py7/bK45O1t yZEIvRtFb5VY0+4Td3ILGNcPY8BcC9+426g1Qg8AloB1c3jijWuTtGICdIAaEYUj/I6D 3fPw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=pqx5ElE73dm/S04q37hWD2sxsJ5GUhrgIeEeP8gVKSc=; b=lXydodGvvTVQQSu7x4ee8idZoTBn/9PvLWXSj/fYES9v9S6vCMlwgP5M3lgxJtdgq6 RkbAoHFS80lKBXsDpLnRtP5yGcWKmmalK7oxfBZZ9+ZMkbnj0chX+xCGIWs01r6vIRcz hYqcAC6wSbb3G2GLA53hjz1wN8Ihg53O+5sG59YakCObo8R5r71JFmxUUHgsiWIxnWxR jPFHPJjbWJ3kHJSDfy5xYn/SN7zVymdKFLKIZ3/JnXFRYs8BMoq2MSulIs5ERVd39gVT tkRghdaVSWrfmSlWMZZxY30BL1AnXXlT9doH4pSaIC7y/rkbOdj35FeGrE4NFc3fTNxd SgAQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV+JAokztQzgyQWV3wB3AA/zLFm+pteAa1uioLCojBJ8IbihUsL ZzZSiL0oYQLKzqZ5Ksz4D+ulJUtDoM0gSDq+180= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzHCB+srfSqWTZNJP+XM5SV0wrpB1GYXF0JAQ57/leZu+T0vjz1SGm4jVFNEBmM1A4BCy8dT1e8wSWCKYPsvmA= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:9f15:: with SMTP id q21mr619857iot.130.1570203581324; Fri, 04 Oct 2019 08:39:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190903105938.33231-1-jerinj@marvell.com> <1795075.Xzk8EHHx5G@xps> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772580191970A12@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772580191970A12@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> From: Jerin Jacob Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2019 21:09:30 +0530 Message-ID: To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" Cc: Thomas Monjalon , Jerin Jacob , dpdk-dev , Honnappa Nagarahalli , Gavin Hu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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" On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 8:35 PM Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 6:21 PM Thomas Monjalon wr= ote: > > > > > > 03/09/2019 12:59, jerinj@marvell.com: > > > > Added eBPF arm64 JIT support to improve the eBPF program performanc= e > > > > 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? > > > > That's one issue. > > > > > > > > After a quick discussion, it seems the Linux authors are OK to arrang= e > > > their JIT code for sharing with userspace projects. > > > > I did a clean room implementation considering some optimization for > > DPDK etc(Like if stack is not used then don't push stack etc) > > and wherever Linux can be improved, I have submitted the patch also to > > Linux as well.(Some more pending as well) > > > > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/504792e07a44844f24e9d79913e4a2= f8373cd332 > > > > And Linux has a framework for instruction generation for debugging > > etc. So We can not copy and paste the code > > from Linux as is. > > > > My view to keep a different code base optimize for DPDK use cases and > > library requirements(for example, tail call is not supported in DPDK). > > For arm64/x86 case the code is done so it is not worth sync with > > Linux. For new architecture, it can be if possible. > > > > Konstantin, > > Your thoughts? > > > > My thought would be that if we have JIT eBPF compiler already in DPDK > for one arch (x86) there is absolutely no reason why we shouldn't allow i= t for different arch (arm). > About having a common code-base with Linux eBPF JITs implementation - > I think it is a very good idea, > but I don=E2=80=99t' think it could be achieved without significant effor= t. > DPDK and Linux JIT code-generators differ quite a bit. > So my suggestion - let's go ahead and integrate Jerin patch into 19.11, > meanwhile start talking with linux guys how common JIT code-base could be= achieved. I agree with Konstantin here. Thomas, Just confirm the following: While we continue to have 'advanced' discussion on avoiding code duplicatio= n etc and it will take a couple of months to converge(if at all it happens) Just to be clear, I assume, you are OK to merge this code for 19.11(If no more technical comment on the patch). I am only afraid of, our typical last-minute surprise pattern and followed by back and forth open ended discussions. i.e # Code submitted before the proposal window # Gets ACK from Maintainer # New non-technical concerns start just before RC1 > Konstantin > > > >