From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A149EA0547;
	Thu, 29 Apr 2021 21:38:57 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 150F9410D7;
	Thu, 29 Apr 2021 21:38:57 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C34A40143
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 21:38:55 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix, from userid 1086)
 id 7EA4620B8000; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:38:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com 7EA4620B8000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com;
 s=default; t=1619725134;
 bh=pTduHNN9cTrIsat9oK82ONURGfuN/EqpPxFqGrCBHEc=;
 h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From;
 b=htNnOjmgveVkxV/DYvywWbsUUszPHV2dr1McANOS+3CR65H+a7yl9sbhlgmi0u4KF
 JZkF8ZR+HsZbZ3yPXxOchkiVdo5mmCQrEwK5Pj7Qq29lxkXpYjlhTRxPnjf5yPqchg
 HL2DIVElOsr8Iidp5vxMT6InUQIrMO14UmkBiA1E=
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:38:54 -0700
From: Tyler Retzlaff <roretzla@linux.microsoft.com>
To: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>
Cc: Joyce Kong <Joyce.Kong@arm.com>,
 "thomas@monjalon.net" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
 "david.marchand@redhat.com" <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
 Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
 nd <nd@arm.com>
Message-ID: <20210429193854.GH21799@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net>
References: <20210421071733.17794-1-joyce.kong@arm.com>
 <20210429190358.GG21799@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net>
 <DBAPR08MB581444087517D0482396B87A985F9@DBAPR08MB5814.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <DBAPR08MB581444087517D0482396B87A985F9@DBAPR08MB5814.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] test/ticketlock: use C11 atomic builtins
 for lcores sync
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 07:17:06PM +0000, Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote:
> <snip>
> 
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] test/ticketlock: use C11 atomic builtins
> > for lcores sync
> > 
> > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 02:17:33AM -0500, Joyce Kong wrote:
> > > Convert rte_atomic usages to C11 atomic builtins for lcores sync in
> > > ticketlock testcases.
> > 
> > gcc atomic builtins aren't 'C11'
> Sorry, I did not understand this, can you elaborate? I am referring to [1].

your subject line indicates the use of C11 which is a standard [1].

the patch itself uses gcc atomics builtins which are not part of C11
standard so the subject line is incorrect and misleading.

[1] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/standards.html#9899

> 
> Not sure if these compilers are supported in DPDK. DPDK officially supports gcc, clang (not sure on icc).

dpdk may incorporate support for other compilers in the future so unless
there is substantive justification for moving to non-standard/non-portable
code i'm asking that this change not be made as it will complicate those future
efforts.