DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>
To: "Mattias Rönnblom" <hofors@lysator.liu.se>,
	"thomas@monjalon.net" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
	"david.marchand@redhat.com" <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
	"roretzla@linux.microsoft.com" <roretzla@linux.microsoft.com>,
	"konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru" <konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru>,
	Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>,
	nd <nd@arm.com>, nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] eal: add notes to SMP memory barrier APIs
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2023 07:02:32 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <AS8PR08MB70808751FC7FBB7A837EE48E9E29A@AS8PR08MB7080.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4d29cd1e-7963-2804-4a13-58ad0a83397d@lysator.liu.se>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mattias Rönnblom <hofors@lysator.liu.se>
> Sent: Friday, June 30, 2023 3:44 AM
> To: Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>; thomas@monjalon.net; david.marchand@redhat.com
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; roretzla@linux.microsoft.com; konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru; Honnappa
> Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>; nd <nd@arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] eal: add notes to SMP memory barrier APIs
> 
> On 2023-06-26 09:12, Ruifeng Wang wrote:
> > The rte_smp_xx() APIs are deprecated. But it is not mentioned in the
> > function header.
> > Added notes in function header for clarification.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>
> > ---
> > v2: Made the notes more specific.
> >
> >   lib/eal/include/generic/rte_atomic.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> >   1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/eal/include/generic/rte_atomic.h
> > b/lib/eal/include/generic/rte_atomic.h
> > index 58df843c54..35e0041ce6 100644
> > --- a/lib/eal/include/generic/rte_atomic.h
> > +++ b/lib/eal/include/generic/rte_atomic.h
> > @@ -55,6 +55,11 @@ static inline void rte_rmb(void);
> >    * Guarantees that the LOAD and STORE operations that precede the
> >    * rte_smp_mb() call are globally visible across the lcores
> >    * before the LOAD and STORE operations that follows it.
> > + *
> > + * @note
> > + *  This function is deprecated. It provides fence synchronization
> > + *  primitive but doesn't take memory order parameter.
> > + *  rte_atomic_thread_fence() should be used instead.
> 
> I can't see why coding the memory model semantics into the name, rather than by
> specification-by-means-of-a-parameter, could be the real issue.
> Could you explain? Seems like just different syntax to me.

Yes, rte_smp_xx and rte_atomic_thread_fence have different syntaxes.

The compiler atomic builtins were accepted for memory ordering. It comprises atomic arithmetic,
atomic load/store, and atomic fence. It is simpler and clearer to do memory ordering by using
the atomic builtins whenever possible.
rte_smp_xx has functionality overlap with atomic fence builtins but with different memory model
semantics and different syntaxes. Because of the differences, it will make memory ordering a little
more complex if rte_smp_xx is kept aside atomic builtins suite.

> 
> The old <rte_atomic.h> atomic arithmetic and atomic load/store operations suffered from
> unspecified semantics in regards to any ordering they imposed on other memory accesses. I
> guess that shortcoming could be described as a "missing parameter", although that too
> would be misleading. Unclear semantics seems not be the case for the kernel-style barriers
> though.
> 
> >    */
> >   static inline void rte_smp_mb(void);
> >
> > @@ -64,6 +69,11 @@ static inline void rte_smp_mb(void);
> >    * Guarantees that the STORE operations that precede the
> >    * rte_smp_wmb() call are globally visible across the lcores
> >    * before the STORE operations that follows it.
> > + *
> > + * @note
> > + *  This function is deprecated. It provides fence synchronization
> > + *  primitive but doesn't take memory order parameter.
> > + *  rte_atomic_thread_fence() should be used instead.
> >    */
> >   static inline void rte_smp_wmb(void);
> >
> > @@ -73,6 +83,11 @@ static inline void rte_smp_wmb(void);
> >    * Guarantees that the LOAD operations that precede the
> >    * rte_smp_rmb() call are globally visible across the lcores
> >    * before the LOAD operations that follows it.
> > + *
> > + * @note
> > + *  This function is deprecated. It provides fence synchronization
> > + *  primitive but doesn't take memory order parameter.
> > + *  rte_atomic_thread_fence() should be used instead.
> >    */
> >   static inline void rte_smp_rmb(void);
> >   ///@}
> > @@ -122,6 +137,10 @@ static inline void rte_io_rmb(void);
> >
> >   /**
> >    * Synchronization fence between threads based on the specified memory order.
> > + *
> > + * @param memorder
> > + *   The memory order defined by compiler atomic builtin at:
> > + *   https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/_005f_005fatomic-Builtins.html
> >    */
> >   static inline void rte_atomic_thread_fence(int memorder);
> >

  reply	other threads:[~2023-07-03  7:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-06-21  6:44 [PATCH] " Ruifeng Wang
2023-06-21  7:29 ` Thomas Monjalon
2023-06-25  7:55   ` Ruifeng Wang
2023-06-22 18:19 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2023-06-23 21:51   ` Tyler Retzlaff
2023-06-25  8:45     ` Ruifeng Wang
2023-06-25 15:40       ` Thomas Monjalon
2023-06-25  8:17   ` Ruifeng Wang
2023-06-29 19:28     ` Mattias Rönnblom
2023-07-03  6:12       ` Ruifeng Wang
2023-06-26  7:12 ` [PATCH v2] " Ruifeng Wang
2023-06-29 19:43   ` Mattias Rönnblom
2023-07-03  7:02     ` Ruifeng Wang [this message]
2023-07-04 12:08       ` Mattias Rönnblom
2023-07-03  9:56 ` [PATCH v3] " Ruifeng Wang
2023-07-28  9:17   ` Thomas Monjalon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=AS8PR08MB70808751FC7FBB7A837EE48E9E29A@AS8PR08MB7080.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=ruifeng.wang@arm.com \
    --cc=Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=hofors@lysator.liu.se \
    --cc=konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru \
    --cc=nd@arm.com \
    --cc=roretzla@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).