From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4CE7A0C41;
	Wed, 25 Aug 2021 17:19:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AC8A40041;
	Wed, 25 Aug 2021 17:19:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (mail.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.3])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E68A4003D
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 17:19:39 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id E114740015
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 17:19:38 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix, from userid 1004)
 id CE2A640016; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 17:19:38 +0200 (CEST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on
 bernadotte.lysator.liu.se
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, AWL, NICE_REPLY_A
 autolearn=disabled version=3.4.2
X-Spam-Score: -2.2
Received: from [192.168.1.59] (h-62-63-215-114.A163.priv.bahnhof.se
 [62.63.215.114])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C29F240015;
 Wed, 25 Aug 2021 17:19:25 +0200 (CEST)
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
 Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>
Cc: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
 "lucp.at.work@gmail.com" <lucp.at.work@gmail.com>,
 "david.marchand@redhat.com" <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
 "thomas@monjalon.net" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
 Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>, nd <nd@arm.com>
References: <20210730213709.19400-1-honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
 <20210802051652.3611-1-honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
 <YSN1eveZBseV2t4J@platinum>
 <DBAPR08MB5814DFB414E5D78D57B323AB98C59@DBAPR08MB5814.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
 <20210824143058.45b31118@hermes.local>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Mattias_R=c3=b6nnblom?= <hofors@lysator.liu.se>
Message-ID: <c4d5e122-ba7e-17dd-6f6a-75a5e6e5466c@lysator.liu.se>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 17:19:25 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210824143058.45b31118@hermes.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC v2] eal: simplify the implementation of
 rte_ctrl_thread_create
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On 2021-08-24 23:30, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 20:03:03 +0000
> Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
> 
>>> One difference between this implementation and the previous one is this busy
>>> loop. rte_pause() relaxes the cpu, but will not make the calling thread to sleep
>>> and wait for the sync event. So here we can spin a quite long time until the
>>> other thread is scheduled by the OS.
>> Yes, this is a difference. We could add a microsleep to allow for the OS to un-schedule the current thread.
> 
> Why not use sched_yield() here?
> 

The man page is not exactly encouraging the use sched_yield on CFS.