From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35C32A0471 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:51:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 771CB5905; Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:50:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE2642BC7 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:50:51 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Jul 2019 07:50:50 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,282,1559545200"; d="scan'208";a="159121835" Received: from fmsmsx105.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.203]) by orsmga007.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 19 Jul 2019 07:50:49 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx102.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.200) by FMSMSX105.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Fri, 19 Jul 2019 07:50:49 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx108.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.9.235]) by FMSMSX102.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.10.233]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Fri, 19 Jul 2019 07:50:49 -0700 From: "Eads, Gage" To: "Phil Yang (Arm Technology China)" , "jerinj@marvell.com" , "dev@dpdk.org" CC: "thomas@monjalon.net" , "hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" , Honnappa Nagarahalli , "Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)" , nd , nd Thread-Topic: [EXT] [PATCH v3 1/3] eal/arm64: add 128-bit atomic compare exchange Thread-Index: AQHVLYk47HOKzAhLEE+n0YBmX/yo66bSD6EAgABNPgCAABo/AIAAFqyA//+VLNA= Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 14:50:49 +0000 Message-ID: <9184057F7FC11744A2107296B6B8EB1E68D24B9D@FMSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <1561257671-10316-1-git-send-email-phil.yang@arm.com> <1561709503-11665-1-git-send-email-phil.yang@arm.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiNzA0NjEyMzQtYmM5My00N2NmLWFiOTMtODc2MjQwYzlkYjM5IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjEwLjE4MDQuNDkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoiTUE2MVArM3c2XC9FRVFzYiswdGwwa0pWS040SVdySlVNN1RtVVhFRDhyMUpDbXA5aXJUM0lTNjkyR2J2eEZsK1gifQ== x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.600.7 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [10.1.200.106] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] [PATCH v3 1/3] eal/arm64: add 128-bit atomic compare exchange X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 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" > > > > > +/** > > > > > + * 128-bit integer structure. > > > > > + */ > > > > > +RTE_STD_C11 > > > > > +typedef struct { > > > > > + RTE_STD_C11 > > > > > + union { > > > > > + uint64_t val[2]; > > > > > + __extension__ __int128 int128; > > > > Instead of guarding RTE_ARCH_64 on this complete structure, How about > > it only under #ifdef RTE_ARCH_64 __extension__ __int128 int128; #endif > > So that it rte_int128_t will be available for 32bit as well. >=20 > Agree, it should be work. But I am not sure. >=20 > Hi Gage, >=20 > How do you think about this? >=20 I don't see any harm in that.