From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f193.google.com (mail-pf0-f193.google.com [209.85.192.193]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18243F3E for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 03:14:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pf0-f193.google.com with SMTP id g14so10787567pfh.3 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 18:14:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3Z5Tw7RgvYKdcaFFLmCVW/qpFZBwQv+VAJR917wZWSg=; b=Z9Tr/Ch3Qk1c9CdTKeqom9b+BJyphOjjVPLs9lw33V3WZuhGbSimJe11t80Qu5Va6r kwzPNfVtr72dCRbm6s/x12ZD+k3EpbJEoAHaKFKYRo7V0UDLzHDUANfmzukGmOe0af4v scmf1OOh2ICGRXpnWmhuiGlaLqPRniv6yhjOVWjo3W7x72l0Yj4igrSFreZKCYwNZlxx CsNPt4UmMTl5Abtj2OFYdIjz0dYwt/cFMHVupWa2UGVHIxXqL8fSyuQceLUPIUlsRQZC mmaRRTWi6sMKfHtn/7jI0nlFZJiIqkbje+PUA951lHgK/IBbWLweo9/ze1XABaPj/DNg amBQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3Z5Tw7RgvYKdcaFFLmCVW/qpFZBwQv+VAJR917wZWSg=; b=mJAVFc2YyuQeT8WKvoDtGLz8Drk0he8BuS06q9wmKp9ieWMZCCzSbo2SPn7/n0mAxx gKy52d8ftyYgibmAqjMXwB31GsXmzNDrgT0srIhqR5Iowq4T/N+OeRBQwoOOejqRttqM jLK6WFvPjx3mcmCTdttifulyrCxq9n42HGB5yk0b5x9pIX8UGd+OHqzQa/gQWMx0P1op gZYW+g30o87NwhGeIS/ksYZh7iqE4xSsx/qQX12igCcokoeG4YmneWVyAoLoVABOwChH wZ/bVcXZ1Gsmog/MvU7uVZue9FtsI7E7Php/FPBFzA0eRwqLP9jh171saDuCn7tTZOx+ 52lw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tD8AyU4XJzIT9k0M5LP0e/XxnYUeHs+rF6Sx7pikWTS6R6JqZ7T 6p9qgQSJlsmf1fMiwLOQv+8mxw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx48ZidLGBEIixpZWljg1WloRiZ+p6nP7EtWT13M7hHClZ2LU1fIfq3GH51iBPdTzrN28pEbLyQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b081:: with SMTP id p1-v6mr23462446plr.31.1524532454137; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 18:14:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xeon-e3 (204-195-71-95.wavecable.com. [204.195.71.95]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l8sm22674000pff.126.2018.04.23.18.14.13 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 23 Apr 2018 18:14:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 18:14:11 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Jim Murphy Cc: Brijesh Singh , dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20180423181411.68dadcef@xeon-e3> In-Reply-To: References: <20180423165039.51393aad@xeon-e3> <20180423173034.7086b772@xeon-e3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] rte_hash thread safe X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 01:14:15 -0000 On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:48:50 -0700 Jim Murphy wrote: > Anecdotally I've heard that the urcu hash implementation is slower than > rte_hash based on pure lookup performance. Has anyone considered adding RCU > hooks into rte_hash? Not really possible with DPDK (as I said earlier) because DPDK does not have concept of thread quiescent period to allow for safe deletion. You could manually use RCU concepts of RCU and RTE hash; it would require using userspace RCU primitives inside DPDK. This would cause a dependency that would prevent that from ever being merged upstream due to license conflict; but since DPDK is liberal BSD license you are free to do it and maintain it on your own.