netdev - Re: pull-request: bpf-next 2017-12-18

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: <20171219062828.r6xadsdenfn2v5i2@ast-mbp>
Date:   Mon, 18 Dec 2017 22:28:30 -0800
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     daniel@...earbox.net, ast@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: pull-request: bpf-next 2017-12-18

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 10:51:53AM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 01:33:07 +0100
> 
> > The following pull-request contains BPF updates for your *net-next* tree.
> > 
> > The main changes are:
> > 
> > 1) Allow arbitrary function calls from one BPF function to another BPF function.
> >    As of today when writing BPF programs, __always_inline had to be used in
> >    the BPF C programs for all functions, unnecessarily causing LLVM to inflate
> >    code size. Handle this more naturally with support for BPF to BPF calls
> >    such that this __always_inline restriction can be overcome. As a result,
> >    it allows for better optimized code and finally enables to introduce core
> >    BPF libraries in the future that can be reused out of different projects.
> >    x86 and arm64 JIT support was added as well, from Alexei.
> 
> Exciting... but now there's a lot of JIT work to do.

I've looked at sparc64. It should be simpler than arm64.
First reaction was that it would need dumb version of
emit_loadimm64() (similar to arm's emit_addr_mov_i64), but not,
since it's not used in emit_call.
I can take a stab at it, but cannot test. The most time
consuming part is to setup the latest llvm on the system
to compile *_noinline.c tests.
Note to self, I really need to make test_verifier run the tests.