From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Tue Dec 3 18:51:11 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9D5B1B96AA; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 18:51:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpeddiem@gmail.com) Received: from mail-io1-f41.google.com (mail-io1-f41.google.com [209.85.166.41]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47S9zy2MDcz3JPf; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 18:51:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpeddiem@gmail.com) Received: by mail-io1-f41.google.com with SMTP id s2so4915989iog.10; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 10:51:10 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=v++jeO3ACUFwELf+niFDWLYeKbgNV9Rq9Jx8DgFuwNI=; b=Swqi1EtRwD/eKOnnfC2oHtZDI1PH2Y16msMEDqYEzH+Nkwb9s7Q9tfNQYTy6WjIH6H NV7xoyi90myh7ahVD0TEAAMxZUOA53HoSA8oIqWdlVi0FC7u2+Sf8/jG9k+JF4p1Xxgg NAQ7mpKc4Qj/cK4MeWpwupZR0bVyXi+pG1M1C2+5gmwqRgiPL1XD3n5OBD8afSQeLPDe CgmbNkhOMMLiT+XLg1EJRzECxBxMfv3JujRQLWDUI2mnWEPeYYUZVvcnRHtBAVtRHfQy 9p/jQqgGeMknT/KKyLrIwnI9uVXRgo8QSLM8o3I2wS6U5Zgvo6OcQEyXXqAZDiG9kexl xSaQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUzxVPbRdNeucL3ITqJ6PXs46UTsv54Gu/w41GxGY1axAY2LKhp Wv238TYi6zgaxyi28PBS+hy4vlSgdej+f3WuGZ6WaCuvoRY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqylUOtrAZX/cOj1MQGZ7j2XsAB4GIigpSbFZ6Vwf9vq0+llO1sF84AwZXxGqd/SU/+5ILzIO4K6762B18NOaxc= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:c34b:: with SMTP id t72mr3367877iof.17.1575399068424; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 10:51:08 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Ed Maste Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:04:37 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: arm64 as Tier 1 for FreeBSD 13 To: Ryan Stone Cc: freebsd-arch , freebsd-arm , Hiroki Sato Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47S9zy2MDcz3JPf X-Spamd-Bar: --- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of carpeddiem@gmail.com designates 209.85.166.41 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=carpeddiem@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.87 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[freebsd.org]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[41.166.85.209.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; IP_SCORE(-1.87)[ip: (-4.24), ipnet: 209.85.128.0/17(-3.15), asn: 15169(-1.94), country: US(-0.05)]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[emaste@freebsd.org,carpeddiem@gmail.com]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[41.166.85.209.rep.mailspike.net : 127.0.0.17]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[emaste@freebsd.org,carpeddiem@gmail.com]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2019 18:51:11 -0000 On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 12:19, Ryan Stone wrote: > > For eBPF, Sato-san is working on a JIT compiler. Depending on the how > it winds up being implemented, it may only support JIT'ing for amd64 > (one possibility being floated is an LLVM-based implementation, in > which case arm64 support is a lot easier). If arm64 has to use an > interpreter to run eBPF code rather than JIT'ing it, is that > acceptable for a tier-1 platform? I don't think that it should be a requirement for tier 1. We could argue that the feature exists on all platforms, but performance optimizations exist on only a subset. That said, if we end up with a bespoke (non-LLVM) JIT I hope we'd also add arm64.