On 10/11/15 07:39, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
JIT like lua might also not work because you need to rewrite OVS to support it. I don't think that it will be accepted. And it looks like it's problem in OVS, not in ODP. I.e. OVS should allow to use library functions for fast path (where inlines are critical). I.e. not just call odp_packet_len(), but move hole OVS function to dynamic library.
I'm not sure I get your point here, but OVS allows to use dynamic library functions on fast path. The problem is that it's slow, because of the function call overhead.
regards, Maxim. On 10 November 2015 at 02:50, Bill Fischofer <bill.fischo...@linaro.org <mailto:bill.fischo...@linaro.org>> wrote: Adding Grant Likely to this chain as it relates to the broader subject of portable ABIs that we've been discussing. On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 4:48 PM, Jim Wilson <jim.wil...@linaro.org <mailto:jim.wil...@linaro.org>> wrote: On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Bill Fischofer <bill.fischo...@linaro.org <mailto:bill.fischo...@linaro.org>> wrote: > The IO Visor project appears to be doing something like this with LLVM and > JIT constructs to dynamically insert code into the kernel in a > platform-independent manner. Perhaps we can leverage that technology? GCC has some experimental JIT support, but I think it would be a lot of work to use it, and I don't know how stable it is. https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/JIT The LLVM support is probably more advanced. Jim _______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list lng-...@lists.linaro.org <mailto:lng-...@lists.linaro.org> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp _______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list lng-...@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
_______________________________________________ linaro-toolchain mailing list linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
