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 DEDABA00C4; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 10:32:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 108B5427F4; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 10:32:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-oi1-f180.google.com (mail-oi1-f180.google.com [209.85.167.180]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11CE3406A2 for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 14:22:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-oi1-f180.google.com with SMTP id a10so1798432oif.9 for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 05:22:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=/gnmU2GF4xPrraTnzncz4yLisiKeOTf2SffopNlVSeM=; b=DcAPb5IPoNI+68hGs5jU1zM+zyA3e3cN6Km/okMVFkCb33/SwwuVsoudb9FGNROA9D jY6+BAiGiv1SYBffDxBRc2nPVqwh5XKmUcxiITHVXggTG20JRoC+vOE+XOdytzvAuhDP OpUx/kHLgBQ1ftjDkN8eQwl4+S4kCcHwE/g+11e222zZVthEWlgQRvwZEwAbL7uDqsmM ymZeUiP6/tEemySMGioZSe15zJd861YxAOxEdkY4hzy4i7PIb5/21rhmX+Taz2HdzbNP CqLwaWuSce5y0S9TFYQ1exE5UX7iE42bJTIlAioteDEDQLoZPKF97RgkgOZLlpt7lUTT 0lHg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=/gnmU2GF4xPrraTnzncz4yLisiKeOTf2SffopNlVSeM=; b=NV7bVxd08vfOu+V88lc0nEyViR3yE0gd3tdiJ+p0CQCSRwOWENGuJn3BzWezz0l1wr riRTCoXJch8dt4d9YwWOPxbnHwZyCeK9EklRxNf8S7M+twtkfituRhcDVjE9Wh5O+Mj9 3zk4j6+c21/PFU7Dox3tYkcFqTCl2zsahy+wGwu7fowc1ZCU+lohF6Of4FIqWaVBOEOy mHU4Fz3rmbNchV2kteGdt9QQ02t7IjsgFjx17iPqiItNWmyFmyrV4bE9w0vjp572XmeN iFvcgwQru0/9+S/2iTdRJSfEqTTmx8dgfjpCtgCH6WvevZ+0UtesTY+I4rTG6eCtMj2S g39Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531QlNtBN2xvOXAsmztYcNYNfnt1ZRT/mMvTp2Qss8kMoWEttziz kTGubiJt4imYTsUqMlKytbgt/dxxmxfd0qVzJe6cHgFbcoQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzoBxKknvtAqRuGWXSsKMEP96JE1HBv4FFOp2eUx02B7TjgQLCjrvq13QRPHhUA9p29DI73QpmOLrAB4+HRxas= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:1449:b0:322:ed6c:1f2a with SMTP id x9-20020a056808144900b00322ed6c1f2amr768807oiv.289.1650457351160; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 05:22:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Ansar Kannankattil Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 17:52:20 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Reuse Of lcore after returning from its worker thread To: dev@dpdk.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000022057805dd150c6b" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 10:32:34 +0200 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 --00000000000022057805dd150c6b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi, As per my understanding "*rte_eal_wait_lcore" *is a blocking call in case of lcore state running. 1. Is there any direct way to reuse the lcore which we returned from a worker thread? 2. Technically is there any issue in reusing the lcore by some means? --00000000000022057805dd150c6b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
As per my understanding &q= uot;rte_eal_wait_lcore" is a blocking call in case of lcore state running.
1. Is there any direct way to reuse the lcore which we returned from = a worker thread?
2. Technically is there any issue in reusing the lc= ore by some means?


--00000000000022057805dd150c6b--