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 10A7BA0A0C; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 20:51:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F059340141; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 20:51:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E916F40040; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 20:51:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix, from userid 1086) id 3B46020B7178; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:51:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com 3B46020B7178 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1625079067; bh=apaKs4LLbrN/hj0XxAUjxz60OYw4m52Y8SoIBBFi15Y=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=WhpOTpcM0IWAAE0D5nhLGV2lMNV/h/kKJ80A1zGwtu4CL5aDT/t25ebhJEqmhXRTm pXNNkE6qabICTO4wLtFpBwfij/NVNGwSYmOrJUKdvqDFwQbjiWyqddZE/a29ifXaYd rb7MaonxtrXSjufDoNEpNoEYhZd5K/U4J6L6cjt0= Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:51:07 -0700 From: Tyler Retzlaff To: Honnappa Nagarahalli Cc: "thomas@monjalon.net" , 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: <20210630185107.GA14701@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: 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 Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 05:04:55PM +0000, Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote: > > > > > 18/06/2021 01:26, Honnappa Nagarahalli: > > > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 09:54:51PM -0500, Joyce Kong wrote: > > > > > Since C11 memory model is adopted in DPDK now[1], use GCC's atomic > > > > > builtins in test cases. > > > > > > > > as previously discussed these atomics are not "C11" they are direct > > > > use of gcc builtins. please don't incorporate C11 into the title of > > > > the patches or commit messages since it isn't. > > > > > > GCC supports 2 types of built-in atomics, __atomic_xxx[1] and > > > __sync_xxx [2]. > > > We need a way to distinguish between them. > > > We are using "C11" as [1] says they match C++11 memory model. > > > > I agree it would be more correct to mention "compiler builtin" > > as it is not strictly the C11 API. > The log already mentions "GCC's C11 atomic builtins". I think that is correct enough and represents the change correctly. it's misleading and does not attract the correct reviewers particularly due to prominence in the commit/mail subject. please change it to "Use GCC atomic builtins" which describes clearly the actual change without ambiguity. using "C11" implies the patch is adding code that uses C11 stdatomic.h and it doesn't.