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 2AE31A328D for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 18:49:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 120C41BF33; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 18:49:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EC681BF2F for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 18:49:17 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1571762956; 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: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=VTFAMssIFUvfcgntAnWPNJUsttxB0YbDV3RpUvGR4Do=; b=EmmIORlbhCJICC85jJHvzUWtNBkuqOOCLJ8hzSK9w94iwU6R/NjZON8UjWqbllHIX/znaS J8b8tWA+gRZHTmRxuHmTLT0TWXikuCLl+wI9DtR/n1IIYXXsVh3SustX0JmXjGYqISYpTr EdNC0bxLhK3UHxddlatTUwhDHdIhNOs= Received: from mail-vs1-f69.google.com (mail-vs1-f69.google.com [209.85.217.69]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-270-X5iDNOnCMv6qvhGHpOQ6JA-1; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:49:15 -0400 Received: by mail-vs1-f69.google.com with SMTP id g126so1043156vsg.7 for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 09:49:15 -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=4fI+PTw3vxWBrdoD3r/hsLnjoe0p5z6teriRHW+Iw+Y=; b=G3r7XSsNmPTCTE0skZDwD4t5XkTGQF7EmtMCg3PWHWUrDN22tfctIDto2xO91M7/LZ TqdRExnFuHF3/xHwJkfv8On6afasTUD5oMUAcro4oQ8k7YGKPYMg2vaD/9qctVp1wOtu jKavv0RuK8KnBDFuNfOUWpT/ORFLlbChUlO1cayBhy3VKtrp6nMu9zWdJcMcjV4wSrfg Vmh7JTSFoaNzq8pIvpOcJgdkb5/5HvE+dv7W9pI+pgLgLxW6/ArM4eg4Izu4SnW5DoXU dcmfpr9Ty6iCRSQ7XzVbH+GZ1pFLNHDjtgOxaooM+FsNFfy5nPi1Yut610KHlMtO/nvD 7xRg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWJxLqfswe+pJd0GzfY80v+R30Xw1XCfvdztZOtLr7ZdQ5EJfQj MrbyQfGaAYZkQLT2pJol9o88IvJVGjL3QrZSJJRszeUERLG3qT/+8XfeQuewr//sWKD0IZ2/KrV 6Yx/8kJWehxN2w/Wzslo= X-Received: by 2002:a67:fc49:: with SMTP id p9mr2458756vsq.198.1571762954658; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 09:49:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw5jj+2CgtOqNmyFK/SEckc1Cal/oTV8fdZ36hy+hycgHrbnVz6up/cVh/t7tYF42wT/1W+YEAp8AMIfUlJSZ0= X-Received: by 2002:a67:fc49:: with SMTP id p9mr2458733vsq.198.1571762954133; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 09:49:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190925161013.3656-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20191002194024.28782-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20191022093045.3d02805a@hermes.lan> In-Reply-To: <20191022093045.3d02805a@hermes.lan> From: David Marchand Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 18:49:02 +0200 Message-ID: To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: dev X-MC-Unique: X5iDNOnCMv6qvhGHpOQ6JA-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8] eal: make lcore_config private 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" On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 6:30 PM Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:05:01 +0200 > David Marchand wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 9:40 PM Stephen Hemminger > > wrote: > > > +struct lcore_config { > > > + pthread_t thread_id; /**< pthread identifier */ > > > + int pipe_master2slave[2]; /**< communication pipe with maste= r */ > > > + int pipe_slave2master[2]; /**< communication pipe with maste= r */ > > > + > > > + lcore_function_t * volatile f; /**< function to call */ > > > + void * volatile arg; /**< argument of function */ > > > + volatile int ret; /**< return value of function */ > > > + > > > + uint32_t core_id; /**< core number on socket for thi= s lcore */ > > > + uint32_t core_index; /**< relative index, starting from= 0 */ > > > + uint16_t socket_id; /**< physical socket id for this l= core */ > > > + uint8_t core_role; /**< role of core eg: OFF, RTE, SE= RVICE */ > > > + uint8_t detected; /**< true if lcore was detected */ > > > + volatile enum rte_lcore_state_t state; /**< lcore state */ > > > + rte_cpuset_t cpuset; /**< cpu set which the lcore affin= ity to */ > > > +}; > > > > There are still changes on the core_id, core_index, socket_id that I > > am not confortable with (at this point). > > > > I prepared a series for -rc1 on ABI changes in EAL (that I will send sh= ortly). > > I took your patch without the changes on core_id, core_index and socket= _id. > > > Why, please be more precise. > I commented earlier that there were integer conversion with the fields you changed. core_id is ok, and a uint32_t would be fine, but this does not change the s= ize. socket_id needs investigation, but should be safe. I am nervous about core_index, because it is used as a signed integer. It looks too dangerous to blindly accept this change with the only reason of saving space. --=20 David Marchand