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 76066A0579 for ; Mon, 3 May 2021 20:35:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65FB040F35; Mon, 3 May 2021 20:35:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-lf1-f51.google.com (mail-lf1-f51.google.com [209.85.167.51]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D27740150 for ; Mon, 3 May 2021 20:35:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-lf1-f51.google.com with SMTP id 124so9532881lff.5 for ; Mon, 03 May 2021 11:35:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=semihalf-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=TyvqOsTGy/ezT/8r5heAs+YfEC/oCKKPZyKXrqJPuQs=; b=cXpszH7QK4CtkNHSbFb1aWu+ewnwHp0D2HDv83vSjJ/buvzoxrvLMB72U/ukeexuMF LubIJGVCtPNuNES8cqu39F6uKHU1aQtay4XqKAoN7DyXSd8N10MiB6FBk3sPXvaIfAqr JFFtg7FJPLRnlKIhdWIyoOTzyCmXO2LW+q6IUMFNO+Y2oqwb1WBpg/9mobTO0D1LIBvt IkD0f8G+HTonkss50xuYA9iarhqkV+f26nWz/pGU5iWBG6laTMRLvUEj6o5qW+gCwzjR FuHvHDHm1vDQTqUSIddyI39/mf5RUnOgvl9nfZ8HNHR8TRcRqYLz/3BfAgFihwgc5y+o l6FA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=TyvqOsTGy/ezT/8r5heAs+YfEC/oCKKPZyKXrqJPuQs=; b=MbieLCISAGaSAXAvgCXWX6xrDfoESZN4zL8EDzDxhIlW8+GMAo56ZVoMIbH1xP688T cNHd3/+g/V3ylM1pYMvErp0VSSe+Zm/0h36/eD3xhQ5nVpigSYDvhdGCkhEFsjiNpq7T e2SKhBo70LB1O/NCdaF/x5fHGdw8hkFGG+jOVYvky0qFZInQERNzmjohsoJvNCcZlNAP tpuPvkCE7O7QsIy4GuWqVehkNBfYHPwaz4/VTrEApKP3mt+7QnSpCabecReRSA8+bdhb xWOGP6yp6Jc4hizFOM+QmF6sL4C9nQaqW9KWdNMut2z+MtJoHpe3eQ8kp7W2EQyeMSIO xFeQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532CwB0+gp9HarLQxbYRZItH5H7Eqbj/EcduuGAAI5yIoTjcwENk DqiteHaqNl+6wAARaN++gLXa3WMlFjKyzPpJepBb3Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJygRm2HHsDMgm6mufvyONAH7wpzLlaDO4y5Y2HDEBV1o0prd4aGV9cvolMuSESIGynzWW88Bamr60cB978Rua8= X-Received: by 2002:a19:ad43:: with SMTP id s3mr13884340lfd.45.1620066899977; Mon, 03 May 2021 11:34:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210412082901.652736-1-kda@semihalf.com> <20210503142857.GB1726@platinum> In-Reply-To: <20210503142857.GB1726@platinum> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Stanis=C5=82aw_Kardach?= Date: Mon, 3 May 2021 20:34:47 +0200 Message-ID: To: Olivier Matz Cc: David Marchand , Luca Boccassi , Christian Ehrhardt , dev , dpdk stable , Kevin Traynor , Thomas Monjalon , upstream@semihalf.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/3] add lock-free stack support discovery X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "stable" On Mon, 3 May 2021, 16:28 Olivier Matz, wrote: > On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 04:21:25PM +0200, David Marchand wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 10:29 AM Stanislaw Kardach > wrote: > > > > > > The lock-free stack implementation (RTE_STACK_F_LF) is supported only > on a > > > subset of platforms, namely x86_64 and arm64. Platforms supporting > 128b atomics > > > have to opt-in to a generic or C11 implementations. All other > platforms use a > > > stubbed implementation for push/pop operations which are basically > NOPs. > > > However rte_stack_create() will not fail and application can proceed > assuming > > > it has a working lock-free stack. > > > > > > This means that among other things the stack_lf fast and perf tests > will fail > > > as if implementation is wrong (which one can argue is). Therefore this > patchset > > > tries to give user a way to check whether a lock_free is supported or > not both > > > at compile time (build flag) and at runtime (ENOTSUP errno in > rte_stack_create). > > > > > > I have added cc to stable@dpdk.org because check-git-log.sh suggested > it. I'm > > > not sure if adding a binary compatible change to API is worth > stable@dpdk.org. > > > > > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > > > The issue was hit while porting to a new architecture. > > The feature is broken in existing stable releases and it won't get > > fixed by this change. > > > > I'd rather not backport it. > > > > Opinions? > > Agreed. > Agreed. >