From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55F3B2BBE for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 16:45:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 Sep 2017 07:45:01 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,397,1500966000"; d="scan'208";a="149607689" Received: from irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.28]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Sep 2017 07:44:59 -0700 Received: from irsmsx102.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.59]) by irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.7.75]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 15:44:58 +0100 From: "Van Haaren, Harry" To: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula CC: "thomas@monjalon.net" , "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: added new `rte_lcore_is_service_lcore` API. Thread-Index: AQHTHCIRejLk4K1hBEGkGqXEqpO/LKKZoOZA///444CAADSUsIAAB/qAgBw0fACAABEogP///IqAgAARKhA= Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 14:44:57 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1503501027-11046-1-git-send-email-pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com> <20170828150946.GA18980@PBHAGAVATULA-LT> <7169652.mOItyNrJXL@xps> <20170915144154.GA15346@PBHAGAVATULA-LT> In-Reply-To: <20170915144154.GA15346@PBHAGAVATULA-LT> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiMjdiYmY2OTktNGY3NC00N2MzLWI4ZTMtZWJhOWVkYzJlMzJkIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX0lDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE2LjUuOS4zIiwiVHJ1c3RlZExhYmVsSGFzaCI6IjRcL3YySlwvSlFYb2ltZCt2TzJXTmxYbWNRYmVwSVlWc280dHdSZWxqeSthYz0ifQ== x-ctpclassification: CTP_IC dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.0.116 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.182] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: added new `rte_lcore_is_service_lcore` API. 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 14:45:02 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula [mailto:pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com= ] > Sent: Friday, September 15, 2017 3:42 PM > To: Van Haaren, Harry > Cc: thomas@monjalon.net; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: added new `rte_lcore_is_service_lcor= e` > API. >=20 > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 01:57:42PM +0000, Van Haaren, Harry wrote: > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > > Sent: Friday, September 15, 2017 2:53 PM > > > To: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula ; Va= n > Haaren, > > > Harry > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: added new `rte_lcore_is_service_= lcore` > > > API. > > > > > > 28/08/2017 17:09, Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula: > > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 01:49:37PM +0000, Van Haaren, Harry wrote: > > > > > From: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula > [mailto:pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com] > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 10:59:51AM +0000, Van Haaren, Harry wro= te: > > > > > > > From: Pavan Nikhilesh [mailto:pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com= ] > > > > > > > > --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_lcore.h > > > > > > > > +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_lcore.h > > > > > > > > @@ -180,6 +180,24 @@ rte_lcore_is_enabled(unsigned lcore_id= ) > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /** > > > > > > > > + * Test if an lcore is service lcore. > > > > > > > > + * > > > > > > > > + * @param lcore_id > > > > > > > > + * The identifier of the lcore, which MUST be between 0 = and > > > > > > > > + * RTE_MAX_LCORE-1. > > > > > > > > + * @return > > > > > > > > + * True if the given lcore is service; false otherwise. > > > > > > > > + */ > > > > > > > > +static inline int > > > > > > > > +rte_lcore_is_service_lcore(unsigned lcore_id) > > > > > > > > +{ > > > > > > > > + struct rte_config *cfg =3D rte_eal_get_configuration(); > > > > > > > > + if (lcore_id >=3D RTE_MAX_LCORE) > > > > > > > > + return 0; > > > > > > > > + return cfg->lcore_role[lcore_id] =3D=3D ROLE_SERVICE; > > > > > > > > +} > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No header file and Static inline - so this is only to be used > > > internally in the service > > > > > > cores library? > > > > > > > If so, the function should actually be used, instead of only = added > but > > > not used in the > > > > > > library itself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The enum rte_lcore_role_t has ROLE_SERVICE which tells that a > particular > > > lcore is > > > > > > a service lcore as well as an EAL thread some libraries such as > rte_timer > > > allow > > > > > > specific operations only over EAL threads. > > > > > > > > > > Understood that role of cores is important, and that rte_timer mi= ght > > > require this information. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The rte_timer lib uses the rte_is_lcore_enabled() call to check= if a > > > lcore is an > > > > > > EAL thread, Which checks if the lcore role is ROLE_RTE. But it > should > > > also > > > > > > allow timers to be registered on a service core as processing t= hose > > > timers can > > > > > > be done on them. > > > > > > > > > > No problem from me here either - although it's the Timers library > > > maintainer that should check this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This new function allows such libraries to check if the role is > > > > > > ROLE_SERVICE and allow those operations. > > > > > > > > > > If the timers library requires information about service-cores, i= t > should > > > use a public API to retrieve that information. Having "internal" func= tions > > > between libraries is not nice. > > > > > > > > > > I think a better design would be to add this function as a public > function, > > > (add it to the .map files etc) and then call the public function from= the > > > timers library. > > > > > > > > > > Does that sound like a good solution? -Harry > > > > > > > > > > > > > The file rte_lcore.h is in librte_eal/common/include I couldn't fin= d a > .map > > > > file for eal/common and also other functions that are present in > rte_lcore.h > > > > aren't mapped in eal/linuxapp or eal/bsdapp. > > > > I think it is fine as the functions are static inline. > > > > > > We must avoid adding more inline functions without a good justificati= on. > > > The inline functions are tolerated for performance reasons only. > > > > > > We could also choose to add this function to rte_service.h ? > > > > Yes that is an option, and OK with me. > > > > @Pavan what do you think of adding it to service.h, implement in .c and= add > to .map? > > >=20 > The ROLE_SERVICE/ROLE_RTE defines the role of a lcore so it made sense to= put > it in rte_lcore.h as lcore properties are accessed mostly through this he= ader. > I'm fine with adding it to service.h as suggested by Harry. >=20 > -Pavan *as suggested by Thomas ;) Initially I thought it made more sense in lcore.h too, however the applicat= ion should only require knowing if core X is a service core if it cares about services / service-cores, hence I'm fine with rte_service.h too. -Harry