lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jul]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/14] arm64: eBPF JIT compiler
From
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 3:32 AM, Catalin Marinas
<catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 04:49:29PM +0100, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 2:16 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 07:28:06PM +0100, Zi Shen Lim wrote:
[...]
>> >> This series applies against net-next and is tested working
>> >> with lib/test_bpf on ARMv8 Foundation Model.
>> >
>> > Looks like it works on my Juno board too, so:
>> >
>> > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
>> >
>> > for the series.
>> >
>> > It's a bit late for 3.17 now, so I guess we'll queue this for 3.18 (which
>> > also means the dependency on -next isn't an issue). Perhaps you could repost
>> > around -rc3?
>>
>> Thanks for testing! Nice to see it working on real hw.
>> I'm not sure why you're proposing a 4+ week delay. The patches
>> will rot instead of getting used and tested. Imo it makes sense to
>> get them into net-next now for 3.17.
>> JIT is disabled by sysctl by default anyway.
>
> We normally like some patches (especially new functionality) to sit in
> linux-next for a while before the mering window (ideally starting with
> -rc4 or -rc5). We are at -rc6 already, so getting close to the 3.17
> merging window.
>
> Another aspect is that the arm64/bpf branch depends on the net tree, so
> it can't easily go in via the arm64 tree for 3.17 (3.18 would not be a
> problem).

Hi Catalin, I take it you prefer this series going through arm64 tree,
targeting 3.18, is that right?

I understand your preference to have it sitting in linux-next for a
longer period for arm64 material, I'll repost this again after 3.17 so
it gets more exposure in linux-next.

BTW, are you open to this series going through net tree? I'm
(preemptively) asking because during development of this series, I've
had to rebase a couple times against net-next to handle dependencies.
Or is the general practice to handle conflicts in linux-next itself?

>
> --
> Catalin


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-07-24 08:03    [W:0.113 / U:11.492 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site