[dpdk-dev] 回复: [RFC PATCH v3 1/5] eal: add new definitions for wait scheme

[Feifei Wang <Feifei.Wang2@arm.com>]

> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> 发送时间: Friday, October 8, 2021 12:19 AM
> 收件人: Feifei Wang <Feifei.Wang2@arm.com>; Ruifeng Wang
> <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>
> 抄送: dev@dpdk.org; nd <nd@arm.com>
> 主题: RE: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v3 1/5] eal: add new definitions for wait
> scheme

[snip]

> > diff --git a/lib/eal/include/generic/rte_pause.h
> > b/lib/eal/include/generic/rte_pause.h
> > index 668ee4a184..4e32107eca 100644
> > --- a/lib/eal/include/generic/rte_pause.h
> > +++ b/lib/eal/include/generic/rte_pause.h
> > @@ -111,6 +111,84 @@ rte_wait_until_equal_64(volatile uint64_t *addr,
> uint64_t expected,
> >  	while (__atomic_load_n(addr, memorder) != expected)
> >  		rte_pause();
> >  }
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Wait until a 16-bit *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.
> > + */
> 
> Hmm, so now we have 2 APIs doing similar thing:
> rte_wait_until_equal_n() and rte_wait_event_n().
> Can we probably unite them somehow?
> At least make rte_wait_until_equal_n() to use rte_wait_event_n() underneath.
> 
You are right. We plan to change rte_wait_until_equal API after this new scheme
is achieved.  And then, we will merge wait_unil into wait_event definition in the next new
patch series.
 
> > +#define rte_wait_event_16(addr, mask, expected, cond, memorder)
> 		       \
> > +do {									       \
> > +	assert(memorder == __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE || memorder ==
> > +__ATOMIC_RELAXED);  \
> 
> And why user is not allowed to use __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST here?
Actually this is just a load operation, and acquire here is enough to make sure 'load
addr value' can be before other operations.
 
> BTW, if we expect memorder to always be a constant, might be better
> BUILD_BUG_ON()?
If I understand correctly, you means we can replace 'assert' by 'build_bug_on':
RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(memorder != __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE && memorder !=__ATOMIC_RELAXED);  

> 
> > +									       \
> > +	while ((__atomic_load_n(addr, memorder) & mask) cond expected)
> 	       \
> > +		rte_pause();						       \
> > +} while (0)
> 
> Two thoughts with these macros:
> 1. It is a goof practise to put () around macro parameters in the macro body.
> Will save from a lot of unexpected troubles.
> 2. I think these 3 macros can be united into one.
> Something like:
> 
> #define rte_wait_event(addr, mask, expected, cond, memorder) do {\
>         typeof (*(addr)) val = __atomic_load_n((addr), (memorder)); \
>         if ((val & (typeof(val))(mask)) cond (typeof(val))(expected)) \
>                 break; \
>         rte_pause(); \
> } while (1);
For this point, I think it is due to different size need to use different assembly instructions
in arm architecture. For example,
load 16 bits instruction is "ldxrh %w[tmp], [%x[addr]"
load 32 bits instruction is " ldxr %w[tmp], [%x[addr]" 
load 64 bits instruction is " ldxr %x[tmp], [%x[addr] "
And for consistency, we also use 3 APIs in generic path.
> 
> 
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Wait until a 32-bit *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 32-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.
> > + */
> > +#define rte_wait_event_32(addr, mask, expected, cond, memorder)
> 		       \
> > +do {									       \
> > +	assert(memorder == __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE || memorder ==
> __ATOMIC_RELAXED);  \
> > +									       \
> > +	while ((__atomic_load_n(addr, memorder) & mask) cond expected)
> 	       \
> > +		rte_pause();						       \
> > +} while (0)
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Wait until a 64-bit *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 64-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.
> > + */
> > +#define rte_wait_event_64(addr, mask, expected, cond, memorder)
> 		       \
> > +do {									       \
> > +	assert(memorder == __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE || memorder ==
> __ATOMIC_RELAXED);  \
> > +									       \
> > +	while ((__atomic_load_n(addr, memorder) & mask) cond expected)
> 	       \
> > +		rte_pause();						       \
> > +} while (0)
> >  #endif
> >
> >  #endif /* _RTE_PAUSE_H_ */
> > --
> > 2.25.1