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 D202443B57; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 18:53:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A444A402A7; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 18:53:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from wfout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wfout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.146]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1544C40289 for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 18:53:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailfout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB1491C000BE; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 12:53:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 20 Feb 2024 12:53:26 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1708451603; x=1708538003; bh=dhLOU0ptClMJBO/Ykx91hSoApVtAEfJa2hwaKWsNzVc=; b= qgCenhuPMzeq3BusBnLCqsqKZr8QcfMvpUBQu17JecECcUcYiOEY/u7IlEGGCtW9 I+NjmjSqft0EyB1My6HMfYwG4ujqciYqu+mv48GlqtLuqt3hKoqZQNrL5lTq4oqb cUy81eSXrNaXL4yRjjbwfyrVWoklHYm8Ak92CUOfbuGYV5mqoAdsWMO1f+Ik0x5k 40nDD3W2l3RFD3SM8yBjMn52xbqtHnhuWwa0lWpjD7uuACeWXMOOTuqEofbiHA7l YbVdcOZ2ozPaukxYlHf2Y/ySanUFf+tLBPrnweK+fS9C5/caj8MkWatSlPsMoSq8 Fvr5TKPzsKzrSN/2HXNBew== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1708451603; x= 1708538003; bh=dhLOU0ptClMJBO/Ykx91hSoApVtAEfJa2hwaKWsNzVc=; b=H b9TJPHcjEar9IWddClC8na13IPIvvVCfl6xoP1nvCpYnlKvCepMOoHJ/VQR0sckj t/4kEhbP4baaO9NZU5qvjZrxkI2gYNGUgWW8CkgSugBwjDQH1hOVYdXMSne/NekR EXYIhg+PLxck7AZ/5h3I7UtnqpjYX8RGDFHh3+TRD/7IHp17FgIUluOCJ3obYF1E t7H7l9OJ4VSpneyknQY7L3GIMK2KZf4moSoJmrxynM2ukfr2012oy5BfX/Lcyk8m Zd0ir1Y2ZmGGIMsf61+35YNmT61mYO9hshBbvmbeKux6yGTAYBXHl1jh9XZO/NHS CVVJGZaCn/UtsCoRm3KKw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvledrfedtgddutdejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvvefufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedtjeeiieefhedtfffgvdelteeufeefheeujefgueetfedttdei kefgkeduhedtgfenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfh hrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 12:53:17 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Tyler Retzlaff Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Ajit Khaparde , Andrew Boyer , Andrew Rybchenko , Bruce Richardson , Chenbo Xia , Chengwen Feng , Dariusz Sosnowski , David Christensen , Hyong Youb Kim , Jerin Jacob , Jie Hai , Jingjing Wu , John Daley , Kevin Laatz , Kiran Kumar K , Konstantin Ananyev , Maciej Czekaj , Matan Azrad , Maxime Coquelin , Nithin Dabilpuram , Ori Kam , Ruifeng Wang , Satha Rao , Somnath Kotur , Suanming Mou , Sunil Kumar Kori , Viacheslav Ovsiienko , Yisen Zhuang , Yuying Zhang , mb@smartsharesystems.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/18] mbuf: deprecate GCC marker in rte mbuf struct Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 18:53:16 +0100 Message-ID: <11059466.2WqB4rESCP@thomas> In-Reply-To: <20240220172023.GA14108@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> References: <1706657173-26166-1-git-send-email-roretzla@linux.microsoft.com> <7561963.alqRGMn8q6@thomas> <20240220172023.GA14108@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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 20/02/2024 18:20, Tyler Retzlaff: > On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 01:39:52PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 15/02/2024 07:21, Tyler Retzlaff: > > > Provide a macro that allows conditional expansion of RTE_MARKER fields > > > to empty to allow rte_mbuf to be used with MSVC. It is proposed that > > > we announce the fields to be __rte_deprecated (currently disabled). > > > > > > Introduce C11 anonymous unions to permit aliasing of well-known > > > offsets by name into the rte_mbuf structure by a *new* name and to > > > provide padding for cache alignment. [...] > > > struct rte_mbuf { > > > - RTE_MARKER cacheline0; > > > - > > > - void *buf_addr; /**< Virtual address of segment buffer. */ > > > + __rte_marker(RTE_MARKER, cacheline0); > > > + union { > > > + char mbuf_cacheline0[RTE_CACHE_LINE_MIN_SIZE]; > > > + __extension__ > > > + struct { > > > + void *buf_addr; /**< Virtual address of segment buffer. > > > > I think it is ugly. > > > > Changing mbuf API is a serious issue. > > agreed, do you have an alternate proposal to solve problem? The best would be that MSVC supports a kind of struct marker.