[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160514.161206.373725987038622109.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 16:12:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: will.deacon@....com
Cc: zlim.lnx@...il.com, ast@...nel.org, catalin.marinas@....com,
daniel@...earbox.net, yang.shi@...aro.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: bpf: jit JMP_JSET_{X,K}
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 11:03:07 +0100
> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 10:57:18AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:37:58PM -0700, Zi Shen Lim wrote:
>> > Original implementation commit e54bcde3d69d ("arm64: eBPF JIT compiler")
>> > had the relevant code paths, but due to an oversight always fail jiting.
>> >
>> > As a result, we had been falling back to BPF interpreter whenever a BPF
>> > program has JMP_JSET_{X,K} instructions.
>> >
>> > With this fix, we confirm that the corresponding tests in lib/test_bpf
>> > continue to pass, and also jited.
>> >
>> > ...
>> > [ 2.784553] test_bpf: #30 JSET jited:1 188 192 197 PASS
>> > [ 2.791373] test_bpf: #31 tcpdump port 22 jited:1 325 677 625 PASS
>> > [ 2.808800] test_bpf: #32 tcpdump complex jited:1 323 731 991 PASS
>> > ...
>> > [ 3.190759] test_bpf: #237 JMP_JSET_K: if (0x3 & 0x2) return 1 jited:1 110 PASS
>> > [ 3.192524] test_bpf: #238 JMP_JSET_K: if (0x3 & 0xffffffff) return 1 jited:1 98 PASS
>> > [ 3.211014] test_bpf: #249 JMP_JSET_X: if (0x3 & 0x2) return 1 jited:1 120 PASS
>> > [ 3.212973] test_bpf: #250 JMP_JSET_X: if (0x3 & 0xffffffff) return 1 jited:1 89 PASS
>> > ...
>> >
>> > Fixes: e54bcde3d69d ("arm64: eBPF JIT compiler")
>> > Signed-off-by: Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@...il.com>
...
> Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
>
> I'm assuming David will queue this?
Yep I got this, applied, thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists