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 47FD845E06; Mon, 2 Dec 2024 17:13:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCDC84025D; Mon, 2 Dec 2024 17:13:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-pj1-f46.google.com (mail-pj1-f46.google.com [209.85.216.46]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C161400D6 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2024 17:13:42 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-pj1-f46.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2eeb2e749c5so1143732a91.0 for ; Mon, 02 Dec 2024 08:13:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1733156021; x=1733760821; darn=dpdk.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=U1mT0sePX25fJpp7Lwk7n+JqoyD2yChFBTYYYwJ+bvs=; b=Kh3g2foUJkEnsZLQDU57DIaJdBIVt7Lnb+gcdyoC+i9lg0+alMW62xMgjj3+HLF/Wf fup8SpmdW+rciDCLqI0LxqYXSowSUfVkPy0c/LVx74xVdiMO2tky3RLltRIE6aYvd/ST Fg0rolKib1tP7RuDQPzEsGsunRV1GZjTzkF5hccFMIGSUxN8zqo2Kth07v3tGfxYKXnL oM/+js/cL+Ao9YDlL459/q3nEWDPfUOt7OJ4xqv1vOPBXCrvAq/7LQuHpjqih3U9+kt0 ePwLp9Xk5e5h9LxeX7eZKfKghlshXBA8iaS8aLYYGHeE86owpaD/40uYwvzDPUq1xOv7 9YDw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1733156021; x=1733760821; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=U1mT0sePX25fJpp7Lwk7n+JqoyD2yChFBTYYYwJ+bvs=; b=bLQsrXZY9c4fjPSJqmyDaazY6pGSiOCLEn49pK0WCQhGIcSUlI+50MvEyTaP5HTPEZ lIfVsBcpvsLXszLx5H8hXe0TmFT2Tbd2zY25TUIzaXQlsrwpZmKhOvIgFh4oC9fBs3tJ 7vQHiPqPrIXDWVj26J593M1X81lb3W1YjQpiWozfW+NJbbi70gFyHBgQH2bG6pFFNUkM 3AIaJ+N1w283aRbwiCMhVv+X/dVKpwSTS2pPwypB5Qp4GXUHT/3HDnb+q9033AmH4jqO KDIjES8uhlYcw/lKXg5YJGej3+DrNilDqe2oJ9xaL7ValDgxSq7fFBRXlYLg3sbA9rED MkRg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywom2H4e07PanrPAh2LwdvGxAkpOkF8jIzB4gAxryTLwWb4W+sq coKpzGTaDOptSipdVD1ws7S2aY6BZC2Stk7t7qq+iVbjv7dShWs7ec63LHeh1oGwtZQS5JsHw56 r X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvxJsNki3O8T/LVHi1w4jD3GSyA/AceR68Md+RODtjXia8JTKrFs+AP62rClrM S2EAj2EEcrLSnXrZHaLcT2+oWk88TWhSBvfiWP4iBQzPuI43eA+5JYnsDS62z1eo7A1hUDFC48y jEsv8whzep7MIdq9eo5GyCaV+4DWnxAEAi7F1p87oJ2899Z/KxCkwbLyoCfxp/ylIgI0a60d/pz Go+CvlpZiGNnaFE7mcjRBVVwkprG7AqRfwP4tJ2ubi9cU0C5h0Ya4C5IgHeOnrLqvjXighqPtp1 LMMazs5bFTCeJhCRz4gLxudeIsk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGxFifzYauKCcFAhfcShdMq8d/q4nIg6E+UHSdHxetducHbRWxqODwYHhStaBhSlAdoIsaxQg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:2808:b0:2ee:59af:a432 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2ee59afa5c2mr16953035a91.31.1733156021032; Mon, 02 Dec 2024 08:13:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from hermes.local (204-195-96-226.wavecable.com. [204.195.96.226]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 98e67ed59e1d1-2ee46f19e4csm7183881a91.16.2024.12.02.08.13.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 02 Dec 2024 08:13:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 08:13:38 -0800 From: Stephen Hemminger To: David Marchand Cc: dev@dpdk.org, thomas@monjalon.net, Tyler Retzlaff Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] eal: add enhanced lock annotations Message-ID: <20241202081338.26ef799e@hermes.local> In-Reply-To: <20241202125316.3732529-2-david.marchand@redhat.com> References: <20241202125316.3732529-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> <20241202125316.3732529-2-david.marchand@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 13:53:14 +0100 David Marchand wrote: > diff --git a/doc/api/doxy-api.conf.in b/doc/api/doxy-api.conf.in > index d23352d300..ac490e7631 100644 > --- a/doc/api/doxy-api.conf.in > +++ b/doc/api/doxy-api.conf.in > @@ -103,6 +103,18 @@ PREDEFINED = __DOXYGEN__ \ > __rte_shared_trylock_function(x)= \ > __rte_assert_shared_lock(x)= \ > __rte_unlock_function(x)= \ > + __rte_capability(x)= \ > + __rte_requires_capability(x)= \ > + __rte_acquire_capability(x)= \ > + __rte_try_acquire_capability(x)= \ > + __rte_release_capability(x)= \ > + __rte_assert_capability(x)= \ > + __rte_requires_shared_capability(x)= \ > + __rte_acquire_shared_capability(x)= \ > + __rte_try_acquire_shared_capability(x)= \ > + __rte_release_shared_capability(x)= \ > + __rte_assert_shared_capability(x)= \ > + __rte_exclude_capability(x)= \ > __attribute__(x)= I would suggest shortened names: __rte_acquires(x) __rte_releases(x) __rte_must_hold(x) Based on the original source of all these lock annotations which is sparse.