From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD1B8C43218 for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 22:24:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D05120859 for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 22:24:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=netronome-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@netronome-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="ScMWjR5/" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390051AbfFJWYm (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jun 2019 18:24:42 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-f196.google.com ([209.85.160.196]:39518 "EHLO mail-qt1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2389083AbfFJWYl (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jun 2019 18:24:41 -0400 Received: by mail-qt1-f196.google.com with SMTP id i34so12242307qta.6 for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 15:24:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netronome-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references :organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZZTpeDRORjV0nyxbNNGLjE/GLXKZO6sNN1Vra2yosmw=; b=ScMWjR5/nJAYssewEAjjFgcZE2SfE8zR62K7wh74u4A2nJwO4kqeZ3X8X4oa4UWR20 sxhLio6aCospg9EA694s5QxKYbQdDIKsWzUxWLFUNoM6E51RWlOYwalAOXjETN6bSHjr jLllSXgX1b5cfxzwAJg3cu1lfGHVQuYNnNxNqmdH5boqCnzUFzoAq23lGCSlc0B0HmPy 3XP5prfFF1Q5x8eEYCffmapQDKv2lkVHW4Qag52uHGzmGKvNfgDXXJRMevQwp8pr4lAX 4+LQKroQrz5a/hE3t6mD2bx4LLTERV2N+MNpsqWe6rSfX5IOpoXA6dngfDGRDRWIVyia 4SRw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZZTpeDRORjV0nyxbNNGLjE/GLXKZO6sNN1Vra2yosmw=; b=QW6dau/HJVtfoGgcAhb2DayXT5PjlCNiUTk/oMIxdIikPr2pm28gWpGOn8x7acAd7Z 6YhDBwG621ax/xi3jf3YqC8Hvespr8TGIDbdLT+ow0h4KNbBhOdDsA+oAYYqUXlFdV2F +zUGuWHZTGctqNWzt3Hn1dKmgla/7vIuMo5NGQORvUGYXGXjbYUQT8WlWu/9WkVYVK3l oth5MDsNQSKV9tL3JYJhIYAVkONPMmwYx8bz4H+P2AZm1yfRw1R7dQ3ovd9qxzo4KaFT iO+iv40YSU0EFeq3r1h7kmzL6hm9AavD7gakO4fpUx2bJGzoU0E3esO22x4ES1yrz5YF Gpjw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVN5YRdMFSu8NCYw3WJClH7hIEc+/wbjtu0a/hgZIeILvpfTzLn QW29zrArRv/m+rO5SQuDfZHUEg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwjUooaVBXa4+Fz8YPrkeAxBhkmMSqnGS0cpqs0S4sX71JBwZy/H0MP0eTnJchBgOyWveEHOQ== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:1796:: with SMTP id o22mr57140249qtj.98.1560205480769; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 15:24:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cakuba.netronome.com ([66.60.152.14]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b203sm5248455qkg.29.2019.06.10.15.24.39 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 10 Jun 2019 15:24:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 15:24:33 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: =?UTF-8?B?QmrDtnJuIFTDtnBlbA==?= Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, magnus.karlsson@intel.com, bjorn.topel@intel.com, toke@redhat.com, brouer@redhat.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org, saeedm@mellanox.com Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 0/5] net: xdp: refactor XDP program queries Message-ID: <20190610152433.6e265d6c@cakuba.netronome.com> In-Reply-To: <20190610160234.4070-1-bjorn.topel@gmail.com> References: <20190610160234.4070-1-bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Organization: Netronome Systems, Ltd. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: bpf-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 18:02:29 +0200, Bj=C3=B6rn T=C3=B6pel wrote: > Jakub, what's your thoughts on the special handling of XDP offloading? > Maybe it's just overkill? Just allocate space for the offloaded > program regardless support or not? Also, please review the > dev_xdp_support_offload() addition into the nfp code. I'm not a huge fan of the new approach - it adds a conditional move, dereference and a cache line reference to the fast path :( I think it'd be fine to allocate entries for all 3 types, but the potential of slowing down DRV may not be a good thing in a refactoring series.