From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61827439E2; Sat, 27 Jan 2024 19:31:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D593C402EC; Sat, 27 Jan 2024 19:31:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (mail.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.3]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 763F8402D5; Sat, 27 Jan 2024 19:31:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAB835894; Sat, 27 Jan 2024 19:31:47 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix, from userid 1004) id A24245907; Sat, 27 Jan 2024 19:31:47 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-13) on hermod.lysator.liu.se X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=disabled version=4.0.0 X-Spam-Score: -1.4 Received: from [192.168.1.59] (h-62-63-215-114.A163.priv.bahnhof.se [62.63.215.114]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 927C75905; Sat, 27 Jan 2024 19:31:45 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <01427f5d-a297-4ca5-b5e3-5a10bf83cd36@lysator.liu.se> Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2024 19:31:45 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-US To: "dev@dpdk.org" From: =?UTF-8?Q?Mattias_R=C3=B6nnblom?= Subject: Potential RTE bitset RFC Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Mattias_R=C3=B6nnblom?= , "techboard@dpdk.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Hi. The new timer RFC ("htimer") I submitted last year also included a new bitset API. https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20230315170342.214127-2-mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com/ My experience is that multi-word bitsets are often useful. Examples from DPDK are rte_service.c and DSW its "service ports" bitset (both have 64 as a hard upper limit). Small, but multi-word, bitsets are not particularly hard to open-code, but then you end up with a lot of duplication. I wanted to ask if there is an interest in seeing a bitset API (as per my patchset) in DPDK. Upstreaming htimer, including having it replace today's rte_timer is more work than I can commit to, so I think you won't get RTE bitset that way any time soon. Regards, Mattias