[PATCH 00/14] arm64: eBPF JIT compiler

[catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas)]

On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 04:49:29PM +0100, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 2:16 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 07:28:06PM +0100, Zi Shen Lim wrote:
> >> This series implements eBPF JIT compiler for arm64.
> >> Please see [14/14] for change log.
> >>
> >> Patches [1-13/14] implement code generation functions.
> >> Patch [14/14] implements the actual eBPF JIT compiler.
> >>
> >> Many thanks to everyone who's reviewed the code from
> >> RFCv1->RFCv3, especially Alexei for BPF bits, and Will
> >> for ARM64 codegen bits :)
> >>
> >> BTW, I'm happy to maintain arch/arm64/net (i.e. arm64 BPF bits).
> >> Should I add a patch updating MAINTAINERS as Patch 15?
> >
> > I don't think that's necessary at the moment, but if we start seeing an
> > influx of patches to arch/arm64/net, then that could make sense in the
> > future.
> >
> >> This series requires a patch that exports a function
> >> from net/core (resulting from RFCv1 discussion). This patch
> >> has been merged into net-next @ 9f12fbe603f7
> >> ("net: filter: move load_pointer() into filter.h").
> >>
> >> This series applies against net-next and is tested working
> >> with lib/test_bpf on ARMv8 Foundation Model.
> >
> > Looks like it works on my Juno board too, so:
> >
> >   Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> >
> > for the series.
> >
> > It's a bit late for 3.17 now, so I guess we'll queue this for 3.18 (which
> > also means the dependency on -next isn't an issue). Perhaps you could repost
> > around -rc3?
> 
> Thanks for testing! Nice to see it working on real hw.
> I'm not sure why you're proposing a 4+ week delay. The patches
> will rot instead of getting used and tested. Imo it makes sense to
> get them into net-next now for 3.17.
> JIT is disabled by sysctl by default anyway.

We normally like some patches (especially new functionality) to sit in
linux-next for a while before the mering window (ideally starting with
-rc4 or -rc5). We are at -rc6 already, so getting close to the 3.17
merging window.

Another aspect is that the arm64/bpf branch depends on the net tree, so
it can't easily go in via the arm64 tree for 3.17 (3.18 would not be a
problem).

-- 
Catalin