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 6EA98A0C41; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 18:02:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E46944003F; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 18:02:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0B9D4003E; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 18:02:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix, from userid 1086) id 2684E20B7188; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 09:02:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com 2684E20B7188 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1624464174; bh=qdFVeNFZ1+2Wu0+iXp7dQzq9s11DGKP+gZYskAcOBSY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=PMNpq3sTWqWbq0wq1ggT82UfA4h3VQd7nSYwp71XaBb8W7ijTLcxEUVXp9pGMb/rX nICAEduE8wgHbsVfPwRenLudyY/N0g+OsoHO3C5xa7/WHZ/aXK5yjzgmVuQTiBD1y3 /DL8QqGTJ+0zLstRoimBEyI5M/6Ojr2VO14ycpDo= Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2021 09:02:54 -0700 From: Tyler Retzlaff To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: Honnappa Nagarahalli , Joyce Kong , dev@dpdk.org, "david.marchand@redhat.com" , "stephen@networkplumber.org" , "olivier.matz@6wind.com" , "andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru" , "harry.van.haaren@intel.com" , Ruifeng Wang , nd , "techboard@dpdk.org" Message-ID: <20210623160254.GA27814@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> References: <20210604094624.31308-1-joyce.kong@arm.com> <20210617152155.GD29777@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> <7557795.l8Y19qOmnl@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7557795.l8Y19qOmnl@thomas> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/8] use GCC's C11 atomic builtins for test 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 Sender: "dev" On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 12:24:55PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 18/06/2021 01:26, Honnappa Nagarahalli: > > Yes such wrapper is not required *today*. > We have 2 options: > 1/ introduce a wrapper now to anticipate any future issue > 2/ introduce a wrapper later when required > > Given we already use these builtins, we should not block this patchset. > If it is decided to change the policy, then we'll replace the calls > to the compiler builtins in all the codebase. agreed. on the condition that the community accepts that a broad tree-wide change (or set of changes) will have to be accepted later to introduce the abstraction. > > This needs to be discussed at the Techboard. I have CCed the Techboard. > > The Techboard meets once in 2 weeks. The details are at [3]. > > Next meeting is on 6/30 at 10am CST. Can you please attend and make your case? > > I agree to discuss options 1 or 2 in a techboard meeting. option 2 (when required) is acceptable. in general it would be good to communicate that this isn't the only abstraction that will be introduced to improve portability. there are areas other than atomics that need to be addressed in the platform/toolchain matrix. thanks