DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
To: Feifei Wang <Feifei.Wang2@arm.com>
Cc: Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>,
	 "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
	dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>, nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/5] eal: add new definitions for wait scheme
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 15:13:36 +0530
Message-ID: <CALBAE1NY_hTYAQ4TqqorPqrU4508f3GQaeRTA+X5GeeTiHx+WA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DB9PR08MB69236BF67B895C6EAB8A41D3C8839@DB9PR08MB6923.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>

On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 3:01 PM Feifei Wang <Feifei.Wang2@arm.com> wrote:
>
> > -----邮件原件-----
> > 发件人: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
> > 发送时间: Friday, October 22, 2021 8:10 AM
> > 收件人: Feifei Wang <Feifei.Wang2@arm.com>
> > 抄送: Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
> > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>; nd
> > <nd@arm.com>
> > 主题: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/5] eal: add new definitions for wait scheme
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 2:16 PM Feifei Wang <feifei.wang2@arm.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Introduce macros as generic interface for address monitoring.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Feifei Wang <feifei.wang2@arm.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>
> > > ---
> > >  lib/eal/arm/include/rte_pause_64.h  | 126
> > > ++++++++++++++++------------  lib/eal/include/generic/rte_pause.h |
> > > 32 +++++++
> > >  2 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/lib/eal/arm/include/rte_pause_64.h
> > > b/lib/eal/arm/include/rte_pause_64.h
> > > index e87d10b8cc..23954c2de2 100644
> > > --- a/lib/eal/arm/include/rte_pause_64.h
> > > +++ b/lib/eal/arm/include/rte_pause_64.h
> > > @@ -31,20 +31,12 @@ static inline void rte_pause(void)
> > >  /* Put processor into low power WFE(Wait For Event) state. */
> > > #define __WFE() { asm volatile("wfe" : : : "memory"); }
> > >
> > > -static __rte_always_inline void
> > > -rte_wait_until_equal_16(volatile uint16_t *addr, uint16_t expected,
> > > -               int memorder)
> > > -{
> > > -       uint16_t value;
> > > -
> > > -       assert(memorder == __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE || memorder ==
> > __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > > -
> > > -       /*
> > > -        * Atomic exclusive load from addr, it returns the 16-bit content of
> > > -        * *addr while making it 'monitored',when it is written by someone
> > > -        * else, the 'monitored' state is cleared and a event is generated
> >
> > a event -> an event in all the occurrence.
> >
> > > -        * implicitly to exit WFE.
> > > -        */
> > > +/*
> > > + * Atomic exclusive load from addr, it returns the 16-bit content of
> > > + * *addr while making it 'monitored', when it is written by someone
> > > + * else, the 'monitored' state is cleared and a event is generated
> > > + * implicitly to exit WFE.
> > > + */
> > >  #define __LOAD_EXC_16(src, dst, memorder) {               \
> > >         if (memorder == __ATOMIC_RELAXED) {               \
> > >                 asm volatile("ldxrh %w[tmp], [%x[addr]]"  \ @@ -58,6
> > > +50,52 @@ rte_wait_until_equal_16(volatile uint16_t *addr, uint16_t
> > expected,
> > >                         : "memory");                      \
> > >         } }
> > >
> > > +/*
> > > + * Atomic exclusive load from addr, it returns the 32-bit content of
> > > + * *addr while making it 'monitored', when it is written by someone
> > > + * else, the 'monitored' state is cleared and a event is generated
> > > + * implicitly to exit WFE.
> > > + */
> > > +#define __LOAD_EXC_32(src, dst, memorder) {              \
> > > +       if (memorder == __ATOMIC_RELAXED) {              \
> > > +               asm volatile("ldxr %w[tmp], [%x[addr]]"  \
> > > +                       : [tmp] "=&r" (dst)              \
> > > +                       : [addr] "r"(src)                \
> > > +                       : "memory");                     \
> > > +       } else {                                         \
> > > +               asm volatile("ldaxr %w[tmp], [%x[addr]]" \
> > > +                       : [tmp] "=&r" (dst)              \
> > > +                       : [addr] "r"(src)                \
> > > +                       : "memory");                     \
> > > +       } }
> > > +
> > > +/*
> > > + * Atomic exclusive load from addr, it returns the 64-bit content of
> > > + * *addr while making it 'monitored', when it is written by someone
> > > + * else, the 'monitored' state is cleared and a event is generated
> > > + * implicitly to exit WFE.
> > > + */
> > > +#define __LOAD_EXC_64(src, dst, memorder) {              \
> > > +       if (memorder == __ATOMIC_RELAXED) {              \
> > > +               asm volatile("ldxr %x[tmp], [%x[addr]]"  \
> > > +                       : [tmp] "=&r" (dst)              \
> > > +                       : [addr] "r"(src)                \
> > > +                       : "memory");                     \
> > > +       } else {                                         \
> > > +               asm volatile("ldaxr %x[tmp], [%x[addr]]" \
> > > +                       : [tmp] "=&r" (dst)              \
> > > +                       : [addr] "r"(src)                \
> > > +                       : "memory");                     \
> > > +       } }
> > > +
> > > +static __rte_always_inline void
> > > +rte_wait_until_equal_16(volatile uint16_t *addr, uint16_t expected,
> > > +               int memorder)
> > > +{
> > > +       uint16_t value;
> > > +
> > > +       assert(memorder == __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE || memorder ==
> > > + __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > > +
> > >         __LOAD_EXC_16(addr, value, memorder)
> > >         if (value != expected) {
> > >                 __SEVL()
> > > @@ -66,7 +104,6 @@ rte_wait_until_equal_16(volatile uint16_t *addr,
> > uint16_t expected,
> > >                         __LOAD_EXC_16(addr, value, memorder)
> > >                 } while (value != expected);
> > >         }
> > > -#undef __LOAD_EXC_16
> > >  }
> > >
> > >  static __rte_always_inline void
> > > @@ -77,25 +114,6 @@ rte_wait_until_equal_32(volatile uint32_t *addr,
> > > uint32_t expected,
> > >
> > >         assert(memorder == __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE || memorder ==
> > > __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > >
> > > -       /*
> > > -        * Atomic exclusive load from addr, it returns the 32-bit content of
> > > -        * *addr while making it 'monitored',when it is written by someone
> > > -        * else, the 'monitored' state is cleared and a event is generated
> > > -        * implicitly to exit WFE.
> > > -        */
> > > -#define __LOAD_EXC_32(src, dst, memorder) {              \
> > > -       if (memorder == __ATOMIC_RELAXED) {              \
> > > -               asm volatile("ldxr %w[tmp], [%x[addr]]"  \
> > > -                       : [tmp] "=&r" (dst)              \
> > > -                       : [addr] "r"(src)                \
> > > -                       : "memory");                     \
> > > -       } else {                                         \
> > > -               asm volatile("ldaxr %w[tmp], [%x[addr]]" \
> > > -                       : [tmp] "=&r" (dst)              \
> > > -                       : [addr] "r"(src)                \
> > > -                       : "memory");                     \
> > > -       } }
> > > -
> > >         __LOAD_EXC_32(addr, value, memorder)
> > >         if (value != expected) {
> > >                 __SEVL()
> > > @@ -104,7 +122,6 @@ rte_wait_until_equal_32(volatile uint32_t *addr,
> > uint32_t expected,
> > >                         __LOAD_EXC_32(addr, value, memorder)
> > >                 } while (value != expected);
> > >         }
> > > -#undef __LOAD_EXC_32
> > >  }
> > >
> > >  static __rte_always_inline void
> > > @@ -115,25 +132,6 @@ rte_wait_until_equal_64(volatile uint64_t *addr,
> > > uint64_t expected,
> > >
> > >         assert(memorder == __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE || memorder ==
> > > __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > >
> > > -       /*
> > > -        * Atomic exclusive load from addr, it returns the 64-bit content of
> > > -        * *addr while making it 'monitored',when it is written by someone
> > > -        * else, the 'monitored' state is cleared and a event is generated
> > > -        * implicitly to exit WFE.
> > > -        */
> > > -#define __LOAD_EXC_64(src, dst, memorder) {              \
> > > -       if (memorder == __ATOMIC_RELAXED) {              \
> > > -               asm volatile("ldxr %x[tmp], [%x[addr]]"  \
> > > -                       : [tmp] "=&r" (dst)              \
> > > -                       : [addr] "r"(src)                \
> > > -                       : "memory");                     \
> > > -       } else {                                         \
> > > -               asm volatile("ldaxr %x[tmp], [%x[addr]]" \
> > > -                       : [tmp] "=&r" (dst)              \
> > > -                       : [addr] "r"(src)                \
> > > -                       : "memory");                     \
> > > -       } }
> > > -
> > >         __LOAD_EXC_64(addr, value, memorder)
> > >         if (value != expected) {
> > >                 __SEVL()
> > > @@ -143,6 +141,26 @@ rte_wait_until_equal_64(volatile uint64_t *addr,
> > uint64_t expected,
> > >                 } while (value != expected);
> > >         }
> > >  }
> > > +
> > > +#define rte_wait_event(addr, mask, expected, cond, memorder, size) \
> >
> > I think it is better to swap "cond" and "expected" positions to get better
> > readability.
> Thanks for the comments, it is better than before and I will update in the next version.
> >
> >  rte_wait_event(&buf->bufptr64, RTE_DISTRIB_FLAGS_MASK, 0, !=,
> > __ATOMIC_RELAXED, 64);
> >
> > Vs
> >
> >  rte_wait_event(&buf->bufptr64, RTE_DISTRIB_FLAGS_MASK, !=, 0,
> > __ATOMIC_RELAXED, 64);
> >
> > > +do {                                                               \
> >
> > Any reason to not make an inline function instead of macro?
> Because there were many new APIs for different cases. And then we refer to
> Linux 'wait_event' code for an example. Please see the first version and its discussion:
> http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/cover/20210902053253.3017858-1-feifei.wang2@arm.com/


OK.


> >
> > > +       RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(!__builtin_constant_p(memorder));         \
> >
> > Should n't we add __builtin_constant_p(size) of check?
>
> Please see the discussion with Konstantin.
> 'size' will not be as a parameter and then it is unnecessary to check it with build_bug.

Make sense to remove the 'size'. My comment was more in the direction
of, if the 'size' is required to pass.

> >
> > > +       RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(memorder != __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE &&           \
> > > +       memorder != __ATOMIC_RELAXED);                             \
> > > +       RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(size != 16 && size != 32 && size != 64);  \
> > > +       uint##size_t value;
> >
> >
> >                                \
> > > +       __LOAD_EXC_##size(addr, value, memorder)                   \
> > > +       if ((value & mask) cond expected) {                        \
> > > +               __SEVL()                                           \
> > > +               do {                                               \
> > > +                       __WFE()                                    \
> > > +                       __LOAD_EXC_##size(addr, value, memorder)   \
> > > +               } while ((value & mask) cond expected);            \
> > > +       }                                                          \
> > > +} while (0)
> > > +
> > > +#undef __LOAD_EXC_16
> > > +#undef __LOAD_EXC_32
> > >  #undef __LOAD_EXC_64
> > >
> > >  #undef __SEVL
> > > diff --git a/lib/eal/include/generic/rte_pause.h
> > > b/lib/eal/include/generic/rte_pause.h
> > > index 668ee4a184..20a5d2a9fd 100644
> > > --- a/lib/eal/include/generic/rte_pause.h
> > > +++ b/lib/eal/include/generic/rte_pause.h
> > > @@ -111,6 +111,38 @@ rte_wait_until_equal_64(volatile uint64_t *addr,
> > uint64_t expected,
> > >         while (__atomic_load_n(addr, memorder) != expected)
> > >                 rte_pause();
> > >  }
> > > +
> > > +/*
> > > + * Wait until *addr breaks the condition, with a relaxed memory
> > > + * ordering model meaning the loads around this API can be reordered.
> > > + *
> > > + * @param addr
> > > + *  A pointer to the memory location.
> > > + * @param mask
> > > + *  A mask of value bits in interest.
> > > + * @param expected
> > > + *  A 16-bit expected value to be in the memory location.
> > > + * @param cond
> > > + *  A symbol representing the condition (==, !=).
> > > + * @param memorder
> > > + *  Two different memory orders that can be specified:
> > > + *  __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE and __ATOMIC_RELAXED. These map to
> > > + *  C++11 memory orders with the same names, see the C++11 standard
> > > +or
> > > + *  the GCC wiki on atomic synchronization for detailed definition.
> > > + * @param size
> > > + * The bit size of *addr:
> > > + * It is used for arm architecture to choose load instructions,
> > > + * and the optional value is 16, 32 and 64.
> > > + */
> > > +#define rte_wait_event(addr, mask, expected, cond, memorder, size)     \
> > > +do {                                                                   \
> > > +       RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(!__builtin_constant_p(memorder));             \
> > > +       RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(memorder != __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE &&               \
> > > +                               memorder != __ATOMIC_RELAXED);         \
> > > +       RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(size != 16 && size != 32 && size != 64);      \
> > > +       while ((__atomic_load_n(addr, memorder) & mask) cond expected) \
> > > +               rte_pause();                                           \
> > > +} while (0)
> > >  #endif
> > >
> > >  #endif /* _RTE_PAUSE_H_ */
> > > --
> > > 2.25.1
> > >

  reply	other threads:[~2021-10-25  9:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 113+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-02  5:32 [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 0/5] add new API for wait until scheme Feifei Wang
2021-09-02  5:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 1/5] eal: " Feifei Wang
2021-09-02  5:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 2/5] eal: use wait until scheme for read pflock Feifei Wang
2021-09-02  5:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 3/5] eal: use wait until scheme for mcslock Feifei Wang
2021-09-02  5:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 4/5] lib/bpf: use wait until scheme for Rx/Tx iteration Feifei Wang
2021-09-02  5:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 5/5] lib/distributor: use wait until scheme Feifei Wang
2021-09-02 15:22 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 0/5] add new API for " Stephen Hemminger
2021-09-03  7:02   ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-09-23  9:58 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v2 0/5] add new definitions for wait scheme Feifei Wang
2021-09-23  9:58   ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v2 1/5] eal: " Feifei Wang
2021-09-23  9:58   ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v2 2/5] eal: use wait event for read pflock Feifei Wang
2021-09-23  9:59   ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v2 3/5] eal: use wait event scheme for mcslock Feifei Wang
2021-09-23  9:59   ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v2 4/5] lib/bpf: use wait event scheme for Rx/Tx iteration Feifei Wang
2021-09-24 18:07     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-09-26  2:19       ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-09-23  9:59   ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v2 5/5] lib/distributor: use wait event scheme Feifei Wang
2021-09-26  6:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v3 0/5] add new definitions for wait scheme Feifei Wang
2021-09-26  6:32   ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v3 1/5] eal: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-07 16:18     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-10-12  8:09       ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-13 15:03         ` [dpdk-dev] " Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-10-13 17:00           ` Stephen Hemminger
2021-10-14  3:14             ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-14  3:08           ` Feifei Wang
2021-09-26  6:32   ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v3 2/5] eal: use wait event for read pflock Feifei Wang
2021-09-26  6:33   ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v3 3/5] eal: use wait event scheme for mcslock Feifei Wang
2021-09-26  6:33   ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v3 4/5] lib/bpf: use wait event scheme for Rx/Tx iteration Feifei Wang
2021-10-07 15:50     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-10-07 17:40       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-10-20  6:20         ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-09-26  6:33   ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v3 5/5] lib/distributor: use wait event scheme Feifei Wang
2021-10-20  8:45   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/5] add new definitions for wait scheme Feifei Wang
2021-10-20  8:45     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/5] eal: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-21 16:24       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-10-25  9:20         ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-25 14:28           ` [dpdk-dev] " Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-10-26  1:08             ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-22  0:10       ` [dpdk-dev] " Jerin Jacob
2021-10-25  9:30         ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-25  9:43           ` Jerin Jacob [this message]
2021-10-26  1:11             ` Feifei Wang
2021-10-20  8:45     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/5] eal: use wait event for read pflock Feifei Wang
2021-10-20  8:45     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/5] eal: use wait event scheme for mcslock Feifei Wang
2021-10-20  8:45     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/5] lib/bpf: use wait event scheme for Rx/Tx iteration Feifei Wang
2021-10-20  8:45     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 5/5] lib/distributor: use wait event scheme Feifei Wang
2021-10-26  8:01 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/5] add new definitions for wait scheme Feifei Wang
2021-10-26  8:02   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/5] eal: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-26  8:08     ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-26  9:46       ` [dpdk-dev] " Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-10-26  9:59         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-10-27  6:56           ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-26  8:02   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/5] eal: use wait event for read pflock Feifei Wang
2021-10-26  8:02   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/5] eal: use wait event scheme for mcslock Feifei Wang
2021-10-26  8:02   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/5] lib/bpf: use wait event scheme for Rx/Tx iteration Feifei Wang
2021-10-26  8:18     ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-26  9:43       ` [dpdk-dev] " Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-10-26 12:56         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-10-27  7:04           ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-27  7:31             ` Feifei Wang
2021-10-27 14:47             ` [dpdk-dev] " Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-10-28  6:24               ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-26  8:02   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 5/5] lib/distributor: use wait event scheme Feifei Wang
2021-10-27  8:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/4] add new definitions for wait scheme Feifei Wang
2021-10-27  8:10   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/4] eal: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-27  8:10   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/4] eal: use wait event for read pflock Feifei Wang
2021-10-27  8:10   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 3/4] eal: use wait event scheme for mcslock Feifei Wang
2021-10-27 11:16     ` Mattias Rönnblom
2021-10-28  6:32       ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-27  8:10   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 4/4] lib/distributor: use wait event scheme Feifei Wang
2021-10-27 10:57   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/4] add new definitions for wait scheme Jerin Jacob
2021-10-28  6:33     ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-28  6:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/5] " Feifei Wang
2021-10-28  6:56   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/5] eal: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-28  7:15     ` Jerin Jacob
2021-10-28  7:40       ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-28  7:51         ` [dpdk-dev] " Jerin Jacob
2021-10-28  9:27           ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-28 13:14     ` [dpdk-dev] " Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-10-28  6:56   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 2/5] eal: use wait event for read pflock Feifei Wang
2021-10-28  6:56   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/5] eal: use wait event scheme for mcslock Feifei Wang
2021-10-28  7:02     ` Jerin Jacob
2021-10-28  7:14       ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-28  6:56   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 4/5] lib/bpf: use wait event scheme for Rx/Tx iteration Feifei Wang
2021-10-28 13:15     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-10-28  6:56   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 5/5] lib/distributor: use wait event scheme Feifei Wang
2021-10-29  8:20 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 0/5] add new definitions for wait scheme Feifei Wang
2021-10-29  8:20   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 1/5] eal: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-29 13:54     ` Jerin Jacob
2021-10-31  8:38     ` David Marchand
2021-11-01  2:29       ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-10-29  8:20   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/5] eal: use wait event for read pflock Feifei Wang
2021-10-29 13:55     ` Jerin Jacob
2021-10-31  8:37     ` David Marchand
2021-10-29  8:20   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 3/5] eal: use wait event scheme for mcslock Feifei Wang
2021-10-29 13:55     ` Jerin Jacob
2021-10-31  8:37     ` David Marchand
2021-10-29  8:20   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 4/5] lib/bpf: use wait event scheme for Rx/Tx iteration Feifei Wang
2021-10-31  8:37     ` David Marchand
2021-10-29  8:20   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 5/5] lib/distributor: use wait event scheme Feifei Wang
2021-10-29 13:58     ` Jerin Jacob
2021-10-31  8:38       ` David Marchand
2021-11-01 12:44       ` David Hunt
2021-11-01  6:00 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 0/5] add new helper for wait scheme Feifei Wang
2021-11-01  6:00   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 1/5] eal: add a new generic " Feifei Wang
2021-11-01  6:00   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 2/5] pflock: use wait until scheme for read pflock Feifei Wang
2021-11-03 14:46     ` David Marchand
2021-11-04  1:24       ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-11-01  6:00   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 3/5] mcslock: use wait until scheme for mcslock Feifei Wang
2021-11-01  6:00   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 4/5] bpf: use wait until scheme for Rx/Tx iteration Feifei Wang
2021-11-01  6:00   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 5/5] distributor: use wait until scheme Feifei Wang
2021-11-01 16:05     ` Pattan, Reshma
2021-11-02  2:00       ` [dpdk-dev] 回复: " Feifei Wang
2021-11-03 14:55   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 0/5] add new helper for wait scheme David Marchand

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=CALBAE1NY_hTYAQ4TqqorPqrU4508f3GQaeRTA+X5GeeTiHx+WA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \
    --cc=Feifei.Wang2@arm.com \
    --cc=Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=nd@arm.com \
    /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

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git