From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] arm64: eBPF JIT compiler Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2014 09:07:51 +0100 Message-ID: <20140704080751.GA23379@arm.com> References: <1404278424-31176-1-git-send-email-zlim.lnx@gmail.com> <20140703091450.GB12958@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Catalin Marinas , Chema Gonzalez , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Daniel Borkmann , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "David S. Miller" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Alexei Starovoitov To: Z Lim Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 07:56:54AM +0100, Z Lim wrote: > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > > Does this sound remotely feasible? > > So I looked at insn.c and the only overlap at this point is B/BL codegen. > A whole lot more, e.g. arithmetic, logical, and memory ops, will need > to be shuffled in. Yup, the more the merrier. I just want to avoid having N subtley different encoders/decoders, as this stuff tends to be hard to review and easy to make small mistakes. > Let me address Alexei's review comments and send out a v2. > After that, I can take a stab at consolidating bpf_jit.h into > insn.{c,h}. Sounds good to you? Perfect. Will