From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx3.wp.pl ([212.77.101.10]:22928 "EHLO mx3.wp.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750790AbeBUXqu (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Feb 2018 18:46:50 -0500 Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 15:46:42 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Pablo Neira Ayuso Cc: Daniel Borkmann , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, laforge@netfilter.org, fw@strlen.de, alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC PoC 0/3] nftables meets bpf Message-ID: <20180221154642.2cf8bef6@cakuba.netronome.com> In-Reply-To: <20180220105822.54birmgmr4r24kox@salvia> References: <20180219163706.5388-1-pablo@netfilter.org> <20180220105822.54birmgmr4r24kox@salvia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 11:58:22 +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > We also have a large range of TCAM based hardware offload outthere > that will _not_ work with your BPF HW offload infrastructure. What > this bpf infrastructure pushes into the kernel is just a blob > expressing things in a very low-level instruction-set: trying to find > a mapping of that to typical HW intermediate representations in the > TCAM based HW offload world will be simply crazy. I'm not sure where the TCAM talk is coming from. Think much smaller - cellular modems/phone SoCs, 32bit ARM/MIPS router box CPUs. The information the verifier is gathering will be crucial for optimizing those. Please don't discount the value of being able to use heterogeneous processing units by the networking stack.