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 9B15542D09; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 17:52:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E79E42BFE; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 17:52:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7DA140EDF; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 17:52:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AD785C01ED; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 11:52:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 20 Jun 2023 11:52:36 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t= 1687276356; x=1687362756; bh=eInjqEXgAsGiP8nfo4nyGVKp64RyCZavhCu orh8Qy/M=; b=vAPiN4RQc0VbTop2xKQq/vVdssu1uffM7rFo8du07f2FxSxUkM/ 4m2Dukl0KsoAv1RHwudpa+ml71QnHYMAOdv+TKXisK5pbRN8FISKDEjb9Xsww3ci YV7Zubri3ZJEXl3BhoNGt+ykcsEh3KRDwffSQimVqTtuzZVBxNMdxNncG4xE/dcT D9qFfFPVIDEP8/O9xhCVSsKcSesv/GWro1XzfxcXV/DS8PHzXPTpiUWXZzcUdRts /RRHPvWUuVWBhuRh7A26MU6Hdi9pCLk8Cdy9LoSY/ALiXbsDngmtyLwNEuIZZDbe C8ni2HmHZmJnCwTokJO0+G1CEjrdli8tjag== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1687276356; x=1687362756; bh=eInjqEXgAsGiP8nfo4nyGVKp64RyCZavhCu orh8Qy/M=; b=lhHiP5BY9lE0pt5fvbNPChn9HnRwRGj67b9dShrlCGkjJE+8kkJ 7m0VIoqg7swrJQMvN0BsglwRyBRRM8pLdqiXgK2KdLK/+uo833zbImL9yAJ6Vip9 zrVjsm45JBxWpoco4JXZ8qYfZRv6KMG3cNZykDMI15TFdbN+/LVFiM8PF8mszLk5 KR0Vt6QmjThf1pJqpsN5BEmAmTlgL8NJ7/SWE7GKu4QpbebNXEGSt1rEMwl5GnOC OXFV6SP1SL1ryscW+xvArG9aLmb7O+mOvz1QjSaF3VGaQDAL2ZboIeh/Y8jAhWAK rCZk2DwiyoYgGwANL5bQgj0LdilCCSXoutw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrgeefhedgjeefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvvefufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedtjeeiieefhedtfffgvdelteeufeefheeujefgueetfedttdei kefgkeduhedtgfenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfh hrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 11:52:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Zhang, Qi Z" , zhoumin , Ruifeng Wang Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "mb@smartsharesystems.com" , "konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru" , "Yang, Qiming" , "Wu, Wenjun1" , "drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "roretzla@linux.microsoft.com" , "stable@dpdk.org" , "maobibo@loongson.cn" , nd , "david.marchand@redhat.com" , Honnappa Nagarahalli , Tyler Retzlaff , "konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com" , nd Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] net/ixgbe: add proper memory barriers for some Rx functions Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 17:52:31 +0200 Message-ID: <843639876.0ifERbkFSE@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20230424090532.367194-1-zhoumin@loongson.cn> <38333053.10thIPus4b@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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 13/06/2023 11:25, Ruifeng Wang: > From: Thomas Monjalon > > 12/06/2023 13:58, zhoumin: > > > On Mon, June 12, 2023 at 6:26PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > 15/05/2023 04:10, Zhang, Qi Z: > > > >> From: Ruifeng Wang > > > >>> From: Min Zhou > > > >>>> --- > > > >>>> v3: > > > >>>> - Use rte_smp_rmb() as the proper memory barrier instead of > > > >>>> rte_rmb() > > > >>>> --- > > > >>>> v2: > > > >>>> - Make the calling of rte_rmb() for all platforms > > > >>>> --- > > > > [...] > > > >>> Reviewed-by: Ruifeng Wang > > > >> Applied to dpdk-next-net-intel. > > > >> > > > >> Thanks > > > >> Qi > > > >> > > > > Why ignoring checkpatch? > > > > It is saying: > > > > " > > > > Warning in drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c: > > > > Using rte_smp_[r/w]mb > > > > " > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry. Should we never use rte_smp_[r/w]mb in the driver's code? > > > > No we should avoid. > > It has been decided to slowly replace such barriers. > > By the way, I think it is not enough documented. > > You can find an explanation in doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > > > > I think we should also add some notes to lib/eal/include/generic/rte_atomic.h > > Tyler, Honnappa, Ruifeng, Konstantin, what do you think? > > > > Agree that we should add notes to rte_atomic.h. > The notes were not there for the sake of avoiding warnings on existing occurrences. > With Tyler's rte_atomic series merged, rte_atomicNN_xx can be marked as __rte_deprecated. > rte_smp_*mb can be marked as __rte_deprecated after existing occurrences are converted. Would you like to add some function comments to explain why it is deprecated?