From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>, dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>,
Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>,
Gavin Hu <gavin.hu@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/8] eBPF arm64 JIT support
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2019 12:27:56 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALBAE1OkG197d0DGFvZMdGZDRKBVbdFT+e5C9ZJ21b6ZNLNs9g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4393352.hqBF0BEQvh@xps>
On Tue, 8 Oct, 2019, 1:45 AM Thomas Monjalon, <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> 07/10/2019 21:29, Jerin Jacob:
> > On Mon, 7 Oct, 2019, 11:35 PM Thomas Monjalon, <thomas@monjalon.net>
> 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
>
Yes. But even if it is different code base it is possible to share the
optimization.
- get verifier support
>
Verifier support already available in the library.
What else?
>
I see only avoiding code duplication and getting new feature like cBPF.
> > - 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?
>
Mention the details in the below thread. Waiting for feedback from Kernel
maintainer.
http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2019-October/146004.html
http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2019-October/146063.html
>
>
> Note: as a lot of people, I don't really know BPF,
> so these are real questions to help understanding the challenge.
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-08 6:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-03 10:59 jerinj
2019-09-03 10:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/8] bpf/arm64: add build infrastructure jerinj
2019-09-03 10:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/8] bpf/arm64: add prologue and epilogue jerinj
2019-09-03 10:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/8] bpf/arm64: add basic arithmetic operations jerinj
2019-09-03 10:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/8] bpf/arm64: add logical operations jerinj
2019-09-03 10:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 5/8] bpf/arm64: add byte swap operations jerinj
2019-09-03 10:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 6/8] bpf/arm64: add load and store operations jerinj
2019-09-03 10:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 7/8] bpf/arm64: add atomic-exchange-and-add operation jerinj
2019-10-18 13:16 ` David Marchand
2019-09-03 10:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 8/8] bpf/arm64: add branch operation jerinj
2019-09-24 17:03 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/8] eBPF arm64 JIT support Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-12 12:22 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-10-03 12:51 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-10-03 13:07 ` Jerin Jacob
2019-10-03 15:05 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-04 4:55 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-04 9:54 ` Steve Capper
2019-10-04 10:53 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-10-04 14:09 ` Daniel Borkmann
2019-10-04 14:43 ` Jerin Jacob
2019-10-05 0:00 ` Daniel Borkmann
2019-10-05 14:39 ` Jerin Jacob
2019-10-07 11:57 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-24 4:22 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-04-06 11:05 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-04 15:39 ` Jerin Jacob
2019-10-07 12:33 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-10-07 13:00 ` Jerin Jacob
2019-10-07 18:04 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-10-07 19:29 ` Jerin Jacob
2019-10-07 20:15 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-10-08 6:57 ` Jerin Jacob [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CALBAE1OkG197d0DGFvZMdGZDRKBVbdFT+e5C9ZJ21b6ZNLNs9g@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=gavin.hu@arm.com \
--cc=honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com \
--cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).