Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 3:46 PM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > >> > Ack. I can replace the unrolling with something that just resolves >> > "generic" kfuncs to the per-driver implementation maybe? That would at >> > least avoid netdev->ndo_kfunc_xxx indirect calls at runtime.. >> >> As stated above, I think we should keep the unrolling. If we end up with >> an actual CALL instruction for every piece of metadata that's going to >> suck performance-wise; unrolling is how we keep this fast enough! :) > > Let's start with pure kfuncs without requiring drivers > to provide corresponding bpf asm. > If pure kfuncs will indeed turn out to be perf limiting > then we'll decide on how to optimize them. I'm ~90% sure we'll need that optimisation, but OK, we can start from a baseline of having them be function calls... -Toke
