From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@fb.com>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 0/3] bpf: simple DFA-based live registers analysis
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2025 01:00:32 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3e84b097a284963df4ac26213b10b30ef9efaf59.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAADnVQKcOLDqwhhQpy6YU13ZbY3edGgx1XpXF5VsmXt9Byxokg@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, 2025-03-01 at 16:09 -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 8:40 PM Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
> > Two comparisons are made:
> > - dfa-opts vs dfa-opts-no-rm (small negative impact, except two
> > sched_ext programs that hit 1M instructions limit; positive impact
> > would have indicated a bug);
>
> Let's figure out what is causing rusty_init[_task]
> to explode.
> And proceed with this set in parallel.
The regression for rusty_init was caused by incorrect mark of "r0" as
used because of "may_goto" instruction. This is fixed by:
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20250305085436.2731464-1-eddyz87@gmail.com/
> > - dfa-opts vs dfa-opts-no-rm-sl (big negative impact).
>
> I don't read it as a big negative.
> cls_redirect and balancer_ingress need to be understood,
> but nothing exploded to hit 1M insns,
> so hopefully bare minimum stack tracking would do the trick.
>
> So in terms of priorities, let's land this set, then
> figure out rusty_init,
> figure out read32 vs 64 for zext,
> at that time we may land -no-rm.
> Then stack tracking.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-05 9:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-28 6:00 [PATCH bpf-next v1 0/3] bpf: simple DFA-based live registers analysis Eduard Zingerman
2025-02-28 6:00 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 1/3] " Eduard Zingerman
2025-03-01 2:01 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-03-01 2:09 ` Eduard Zingerman
2025-02-28 6:00 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 2/3] bpf: use register liveness information for func_states_equal Eduard Zingerman
2025-02-28 6:00 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 3/3] selftests/bpf: test cases for compute_live_registers() Eduard Zingerman
2025-03-01 2:10 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 0/3] bpf: simple DFA-based live registers analysis Alexei Starovoitov
2025-03-01 4:40 ` Eduard Zingerman
2025-03-02 0:09 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-03-03 19:28 ` Eduard Zingerman
2025-03-05 9:00 ` Eduard Zingerman [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=3e84b097a284963df4ac26213b10b30ef9efaf59.camel@gmail.com \
--to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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