netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] net: filter: Just In Time compiler

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <0a7fdea6b816da546ea71f752d36b5c2@localhost>
Date:	Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:55:49 +0200
From:	Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@...u.net>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: filter: Just In Time compiler


On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:40:03 +0300, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com> wrote:

> Have you considered putting the compiler in userspace?

Kernelspace (modules, threads, etc) can register BPF filters too. It is
possible that there is no userspace involved at all.

> The upside is that you can use established optimizing compilers like 
> LLVM or GCC, which already support more target architectures.  It may 
> not matter much for something simple like bpf, but other VMs may be a 
> lot more complicated.

BPF is another domain. Standard compiler optimization are not comparable
to BPF optimizations so there is no gain there. Maybe writing a gcc front
_and_ back-end may gain some valuable advantages.

Hagen 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html