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 BC43EA0A02; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 15:58:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DA5B140DDC; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 15:58:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BD77140DCE for ; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 15:58:28 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1616684307; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=bFtI1H4IeivWmC746HQcIOCXdrFUOttSa2Ksv0578IU=; b=Xb2mtteoGfjYWyb+qmTaszjXLGyx+8VX0icYMERMDm4vJmloVXiVKwYJynfYEH2yy+GwfD xjxg/9yUFtJrdQAEKOjnPaxLvOoQ5474Q2p0rdhU505fTTog76eOQJsdUI8L6pDTsORM/7 Lwo01SuoAq+ydu66hlKY8Mo/96/QxZM= Received: from mail-vk1-f200.google.com (mail-vk1-f200.google.com [209.85.221.200]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-361-5CS0KLIwPHqqrMNe0aYwxw-1; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 10:58:25 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 5CS0KLIwPHqqrMNe0aYwxw-1 Received: by mail-vk1-f200.google.com with SMTP id a188so791448vke.17 for ; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 07:58:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=bFtI1H4IeivWmC746HQcIOCXdrFUOttSa2Ksv0578IU=; b=tE6pXu82VBfKtPIFhe2tFXXLOUSbqxA1du4dYiEDdWuGqcRz2AhXb2Oj1CegZxOh2a kHhC7HJdA7+hza0qOtPUybV2UMG2yMdztkesUZINsw3tZbzEsIT0j0RK7WlO32aCKT4N IxuL2eYsvtT7m/jI9z3VkfFLQvNEtDWLFKxFYmi9GQ25DW/9ZJiI+WJL/NsYvjiQvXIj 8UvdeEpFctEhiuY6NiNf1KuzGBCqPNQo7Co7le1FWJFbCSS+Act10eJltDFwtQbq4UQc TEndqTiNdI3U0Xg5fsqQT0mnv4440GjcItzfn9T3fU7GwBFYUucH2ZA4GiX9uJwRf3Ad VB1w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5307G4yAb3qm0ak5S44wY6B7oHfixS2yWz2qSa0wQVLzN+3MLRLa Bp/BphfbKO/0PzGHGSzHuNj4qk64/+Ek7qh1jUr4pThcXoYRag6BegXaWpzDnk3PHQfePiNnfJp Mvowat16qJ40sbp3s2to= X-Received: by 2002:a9f:3591:: with SMTP id t17mr5062515uad.41.1616684304199; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 07:58:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz/G/+6GJ4rHlRAMhojW3vXFHasV9QCFh+pA74vcNpQylRtlOu13tskP+zskn4OGjQ4tSeI1Lqj8y+w+K60eiE= X-Received: by 2002:a9f:3591:: with SMTP id t17mr5062506uad.41.1616684303999; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 07:58:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200424070741.16619-1-gavin.hu@arm.com> <20200426083909.897-1-gavin.hu@arm.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 15:58:12 +0100 Message-ID: To: Honnappa Nagarahalli Cc: dev , nd , "thomas@monjalon.net" , "jerinj@marvell.com" , Ruifeng Wang , Phil Yang , Joyce Kong , "Ananyev, Konstantin" Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/2] Use WFE for spinlock and ring 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 Sender: "dev" Hello, On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 4:30 PM David Marchand wrote: > > Hello Honnappa, > > On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 11:32 PM Honnappa Nagarahalli > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Use WFE for spinlock and ring > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 10:39 AM Gavin Hu wrote: > > > > > > > > The rte_wait_until_equal_xxx APIs abstract the functionality of > > > > 'polling for a memory location to become equal to a given value'[1]. > > > > > > > > Use the API for the rte spinlock and ring implementations. > > > > > > > > [1] http://patches.dpdk.org/cover/62703/ > > > > > > > > Gavin Hu (2): > > > > spinlock: use wfe to reduce contention on aarch64 > > > > ring: use wfe to wait for ring tail update on aarch64 > > > > > > This would result in rte_ring and rte_spinlock APIs becoming experimental > > > and this breaks compilation for external applications using stable ring and > > > spinlock APIs. > > > IIRC, it was the reason why these patches were dropped with the introduction > > > of the rte_wait_until_equal_* API. > > Agreed, the rte_ring new sync modes are resulting in different use cases for these APIs. We need to take a relook at the APIs. > > Will we reconsider this series now that the wait until equal is going stable? Any update? I suppose this would need some rebasing after the ring library changes. Thanks. -- David Marchand