[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151019190835.GA19852@Alexeis-MBP.westell.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 12:08:36 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@...il.com>
Cc: ast@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] bpf: change bpf syacall to use u64 temp variables
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 03:10:46PM +0800, yalin wang wrote:
> This patch change map_lookup_elem() and map_update_elem() function
> to use u64 temp variable if the key_size or value_size is less than
> u64, we don't need use kmalloc() for these small variables.
>
> Signed-off-by: yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@...il.com>
> ---
> kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> index f640e5f..c82d7bf 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> @@ -189,7 +189,8 @@ static int map_lookup_elem(union bpf_attr *attr)
> void __user *uvalue = u64_to_ptr(attr->value);
> int ufd = attr->map_fd;
> struct bpf_map *map;
> - void *key, *value, *ptr;
> + u64 key_buf, value_buf;
> + void *key = &key_buf, *value = &value_buf, *ptr;
> struct fd f;
> int err;
>
> @@ -202,7 +203,8 @@ static int map_lookup_elem(union bpf_attr *attr)
> return PTR_ERR(map);
>
> err = -ENOMEM;
> - key = kmalloc(map->key_size, GFP_USER);
> + if (map->key_size > sizeof(u64))
> + key = kmalloc(map->key_size, GFP_USER);
I think it's a good optimization for common case.
Performance numbers would be good to prove the point.
Thanks
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists