Re: [PATCH RFC v4 net-next 00/26] BPF syscall, maps, verifier, samples, llvm

2014-08-14 Thread Brendan Gregg
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:57 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: [...] > Tracing use case got some improvements as well. Now eBPF programs can be > attached to tracepoint, syscall, kprobe and C examples are more usable: > ex1_kern.c - demonstrate how programs can walk in-kernel data structures > ex2_ke

Re: [PATCH RFC v4 net-next 00/26] BPF syscall, maps, verifier, samples, llvm

2014-08-13 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:25 PM, David Miller wrote: >>> From: David Laight >>> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 08:52:30 + >>> From: Of Alexei Starovoitov > one more RFC..

Re: [PATCH RFC v4 net-next 00/26] BPF syscall, maps, verifier, samples, llvm

2014-08-13 Thread Alexei Starovoitov
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:25 PM, David Miller wrote: >> From: David Laight >> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 08:52:30 + >> >>> From: Of Alexei Starovoitov one more RFC... Major difference vs previous set is a new 'load 64-bit i

Re: [PATCH RFC v4 net-next 00/26] BPF syscall, maps, verifier, samples, llvm

2014-08-13 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:25 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: David Laight > Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 08:52:30 + > >> From: Of Alexei Starovoitov >>> one more RFC... >>> >>> Major difference vs previous set is a new 'load 64-bit immediate' eBPF insn. >>> Which is first 16-byte instruction. It sh

Re: [PATCH RFC v4 net-next 00/26] BPF syscall, maps, verifier, samples, llvm

2014-08-13 Thread David Miller
From: David Laight Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 08:52:30 + > From: Of Alexei Starovoitov >> one more RFC... >> >> Major difference vs previous set is a new 'load 64-bit immediate' eBPF insn. >> Which is first 16-byte instruction. It shows how eBPF ISA can be extended >> while maintaining backward

Re: [PATCH RFC v4 net-next 00/26] BPF syscall, maps, verifier, samples, llvm

2014-08-13 Thread Alexei Starovoitov
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > But don't you need some kind of detection anyway to handle the case > where something jumps to the middle of the "load 64-bit immediate"? I added few test cases to test_verifier to see that this case is caught and it looks ok, but you

Re: [PATCH RFC v4 net-next 00/26] BPF syscall, maps, verifier, samples, llvm

2014-08-13 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 1:52 AM, David Laight wrote: >> From: Of Alexei Starovoitov >>> one more RFC... >>> >>> Major difference vs previous set is a new 'load 64-bit immediate' eBPF insn. >>> Which is first 16-byte instruction. It sho

Re: [PATCH RFC v4 net-next 00/26] BPF syscall, maps, verifier, samples, llvm

2014-08-13 Thread Alexei Starovoitov
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 1:52 AM, David Laight wrote: > From: Of Alexei Starovoitov >> one more RFC... >> >> Major difference vs previous set is a new 'load 64-bit immediate' eBPF insn. >> Which is first 16-byte instruction. It shows how eBPF ISA can be extended >> while maintaining backward compat

RE: [PATCH RFC v4 net-next 00/26] BPF syscall, maps, verifier, samples, llvm

2014-08-13 Thread David Laight
From: Of Alexei Starovoitov > one more RFC... > > Major difference vs previous set is a new 'load 64-bit immediate' eBPF insn. > Which is first 16-byte instruction. It shows how eBPF ISA can be extended > while maintaining backward compatibility, but mainly it cleans up eBPF > program access to ma

[PATCH RFC v4 net-next 00/26] BPF syscall, maps, verifier, samples, llvm

2014-08-13 Thread Alexei Starovoitov
Hi All, one more RFC... Major difference vs previous set is a new 'load 64-bit immediate' eBPF insn. Which is first 16-byte instruction. It shows how eBPF ISA can be extended while maintaining backward compatibility, but mainly it cleans up eBPF program access to maps and improves run-time perfor