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 EE182439F5; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 04:02:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6011E402B4; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 04:02:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.187]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABA6C40261; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 04:02:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.174]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4TNY3L68t8zsWgB; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:01:18 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggpeml500024.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.185.36.10]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4BAD1404F9; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:02:27 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.67.121.161] (10.67.121.161) by dggpeml500024.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.35; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:02:27 +0800 Subject: Re: Potential RTE bitset RFC To: =?UTF-8?Q?Morten_Br=c3=b8rup?= , =?UTF-8?Q?Mattias_R=c3=b6nnblom?= , CC: =?UTF-8?Q?Mattias_R=c3=b6nnblom?= , References: <01427f5d-a297-4ca5-b5e3-5a10bf83cd36@lysator.liu.se> <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9F1AC@smartserver.smartshare.dk> From: fengchengwen Message-ID: <6a15248e-120b-2f56-719c-1df9992769e9@huawei.com> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:02:27 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9F1AC@smartserver.smartshare.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.67.121.161] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.180) To dggpeml500024.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.10) 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 Hi, On 2024/1/28 21:52, Morten Brørup wrote: >> From: Mattias Rönnblom [mailto:hofors@lysator.liu.se] >> Sent: Saturday, 27 January 2024 19.32 >> >> Hi. >> >> The new timer RFC ("htimer") I submitted last year also included a new >> bitset API. >> >> https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20230315170342.214127-2- >> mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com/ >> >> My experience is that multi-word bitsets are often useful. Examples >> from >> DPDK are rte_service.c and DSW its "service ports" bitset (both have 64 >> as a hard upper limit). Small, but multi-word, bitsets are not >> particularly hard to open-code, but then you end up with a lot of >> duplication. >> >> I wanted to ask if there is an interest in seeing a bitset API (as per >> my patchset) in DPDK. > > Absolutely! > Your bitset patch seems very complete, with test cases and all. > Let's standardize on this, so we can avoid variants of similar code all over the place. The bitmap (lib/eal/include/rte_bitmap.h) provides a subset of this bitset library. Maybe it's better to extend the bitmap library. Thanks. > >> >> Upstreaming htimer, including having it replace today's rte_timer is >> more work than I can commit to, so I think you won't get RTE bitset >> that >> way any time soon. > > Thanks for the update regarding the htimer progress. :-) > > I certainly don't object to a dedicated fast path library for high-volume timers, such as those in a TCP/IP (or QUIC/IP) stack. > > In my opinion, the existing rte_timer library can be improved at a later stage, if anybody cares. It's a shame if that requirement is holding back the addition of a new and useful library. > > -Morten >