From: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: "Mattias Rönnblom" <hofors@lysator.liu.se>,
"Mattias Rönnblom" <mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com>,
dev@dpdk.org
Cc: "Stephen Hemminger" <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC v4 1/6] eal: add static per-lcore memory allocation facility
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 16:05:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9F278@smartserver.smartshare.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <adfb1bc5-ae72-464c-acf3-0903834f06cb@lysator.liu.se>
> From: Mattias Rönnblom [mailto:hofors@lysator.liu.se]
> Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2024 14.44
>
> On 2024-02-27 10:58, Morten Brørup wrote:
> >> From: Mattias Rönnblom [mailto:mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com]
> >> Sent: Sunday, 25 February 2024 16.03
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> +static void *
> >> +lcore_var_alloc(size_t size, size_t align)
> >> +{
> >> + void *handle;
> >> + void *value;
> >> +
> >> + offset = RTE_ALIGN_CEIL(offset, align);
> >> +
> >> + if (offset + size > RTE_MAX_LCORE_VAR) {
> >
> > This would be the usual comparison:
> > if (lcore_buffer == NULL) {
> >
> >> + lcore_buffer = aligned_alloc(RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE,
> >> + LCORE_BUFFER_SIZE);
> >> + RTE_VERIFY(lcore_buffer != NULL);
> >> +
> >> + offset = 0;
> >> + }
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> +/**
> >> + * Define a lcore variable handle.
> >> + *
> >> + * This macro defines a variable which is used as a handle to access
> >> + * the various per-lcore id instances of a per-lcore id variable.
> >> + *
> >> + * The aim with this macro is to make clear at the point of
> >> + * declaration that this is an lcore handler, rather than a regular
> >> + * pointer.
> >> + *
> >> + * Add @b static as a prefix in case the lcore variable are only to
> be
> >> + * accessed from a particular translation unit.
> >> + */
> >> +#define RTE_LCORE_VAR_HANDLE(type, name) \
> >> + RTE_LCORE_VAR_HANDLE_TYPE(type) name
> >> +
> >
> > The parameter is "name" here, and "handle" in other macros.
> > Just mentioning to make sure you thought about it.
> >
> >> +/**
> >> + * Get pointer to lcore variable instance with the specified lcore
> id.
> >> + */
> >> +#define RTE_LCORE_VAR_LCORE_PTR(lcore_id, handle) \
> >> + ((typeof(handle))__rte_lcore_var_lcore_ptr(lcore_id, handle))
> >> +
> >> +/**
> >> + * Get value of a lcore variable instance of the specified lcore id.
> >> + */
> >> +#define RTE_LCORE_VAR_LCORE_GET(lcore_id, handle) \
> >> + (*(RTE_LCORE_VAR_LCORE_PTR(lcore_id, handle)))
> >> +
> >> +/**
> >> + * Set the value of a lcore variable instance of the specified lcore
> id.
> >> + */
> >> +#define RTE_LCORE_VAR_LCORE_SET(lcore_id, handle, value) \
> >> + (*(RTE_LCORE_VAR_LCORE_PTR(lcore_id, handle)) = (value))
> >
> > I still think RTE_LCORE_VAR[_LCORE]_PTR() suffice, and
> RTE_LCORE_VAR[_LCORE]_GET/SET are superfluous.
> > But I don't insist on their removal. :-)
> >
>
> I'll remove them. One can always add them later. Nothing I've seen in
> the DPDK code base so far has been called for their use.
>
> Should the RTE_LCORE_VAR_PTR() be renamed RTE_LCORE_VAR_VALUE() (and
> still return a pointer, obviously)? "PTR" seems a little superfluous
> (Hungarian). "RTE_LCORE_VAR()" would be short, but not very descriptive.
Good question...
I would try to align this name and the name of the associated foreach macro, currently RTE_LCORE_VAR_FOREACH_VALUE(var, handle).
It seems confusing to have a macro named _VALUE() returning a pointer.
(Which is why I also dislike the foreach macro's current name and "var" parameter name.)
If it is supposed to be frequently used, a shorter name is preferable.
Which leans towards RTE_LCORE_VAR().
And then RTE_FOREACH_LCORE_VAR(iterator, handle) or RTE_LCORE_VAR_FOREACH(iterator, handle).
But then it is not obvious from the name that they operate on pointers.
We don't use Hungarian style in DPDK, so perhaps that is acceptable.
Your conclusion that GET/SET are not generally required inspired me for another idea...
Maybe returning a pointer is not the right thing to do!
I wonder if there are any obstacles to generally dereferencing the lcore variable pointer, like this:
#define RTE_LCORE_VAR_LCORE(lcore_id, handle) \
(*(typeof(handle))__rte_lcore_var_lcore_ptr(lcore_id, handle))
It would work for both get and set:
RTE_LCORE_VAR(foo) = RTE_LCORE_VAR(bar);
And also for functions being passed the address of the variable.
E.g. memset(&RTE_LCORE_VAR(foo), ...) would expand to:
memset(&(*(typeof(foo))__rte_lcore_var_lcore_ptr(rte_lcore_id(), foo)), ...);
One more thought, not related to the above discussion:
The TLS per-lcore variables are built with "per_lcore_" prefix added to the names, like this:
#define RTE_DEFINE_PER_LCORE(type, name) \
__thread __typeof__(type) per_lcore_##name
Should the lcore variables have something similar, i.e.:
#define RTE_LCORE_VAR_HANDLE(type, name) \
RTE_LCORE_VAR_HANDLE_TYPE(type) lcore_var_##name
>
> > With or without suggested changes...
> >
> > For the series,
> > Acked-by: Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
> >
>
> Thanks for all help.
Thank you for the detailed consideration of my feedback.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-27 15:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-08 18:16 [RFC 0/5] Lcore variables Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-08 18:16 ` [RFC 1/5] eal: add static per-lcore memory allocation facility Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-09 8:25 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-09 11:46 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-09 13:04 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-19 7:49 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-19 11:10 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-19 14:31 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-19 15:04 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-19 9:40 ` [RFC v2 0/5] Lcore variables Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-19 9:40 ` [RFC v2 1/5] eal: add static per-lcore memory allocation facility Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-20 8:49 ` [RFC v3 0/6] Lcore variables Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-20 8:49 ` [RFC v3 1/6] eal: add static per-lcore memory allocation facility Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-20 9:11 ` Bruce Richardson
2024-02-20 10:47 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-20 11:39 ` Bruce Richardson
2024-02-20 13:37 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-20 16:26 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-21 9:43 ` Jerin Jacob
2024-02-21 10:31 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-21 14:26 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-22 9:22 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-23 10:12 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-25 15:03 ` [RFC v4 0/6] Lcore variables Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-25 15:03 ` [RFC v4 1/6] eal: add static per-lcore memory allocation facility Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-27 9:58 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-27 13:44 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-27 15:05 ` Morten Brørup [this message]
2024-02-27 16:27 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-27 16:51 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-28 10:09 ` [RFC v5 0/6] Lcore variables Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-28 10:09 ` [RFC v5 1/6] eal: add static per-lcore memory allocation facility Mattias Rönnblom
2024-03-19 12:52 ` Konstantin Ananyev
2024-03-20 10:24 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2024-03-20 14:18 ` Konstantin Ananyev
2024-05-06 8:27 ` [RFC v6 0/6] Lcore variables Mattias Rönnblom
2024-05-06 8:27 ` [RFC v6 1/6] eal: add static per-lcore memory allocation facility Mattias Rönnblom
2024-05-06 8:27 ` [RFC v6 2/6] eal: add lcore variable test suite Mattias Rönnblom
2024-05-06 8:27 ` [RFC v6 3/6] random: keep PRNG state in lcore variable Mattias Rönnblom
2024-05-06 8:27 ` [RFC v6 4/6] power: keep per-lcore " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-05-06 8:27 ` [RFC v6 5/6] service: " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-05-06 8:27 ` [RFC v6 6/6] eal: keep per-lcore power intrinsics " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-28 10:09 ` [RFC v5 2/6] eal: add lcore variable test suite Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-28 10:09 ` [RFC v5 3/6] random: keep PRNG state in lcore variable Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-28 10:09 ` [RFC v5 4/6] power: keep per-lcore " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-28 10:09 ` [RFC v5 5/6] service: " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-28 10:09 ` [RFC v5 6/6] eal: keep per-lcore power intrinsics " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-25 15:03 ` [RFC v4 2/6] eal: add lcore variable test suite Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-25 15:03 ` [RFC v4 3/6] random: keep PRNG state in lcore variable Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-25 15:03 ` [RFC v4 4/6] power: keep per-lcore " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-25 15:03 ` [RFC v4 5/6] service: " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-25 16:28 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-25 15:03 ` [RFC v4 6/6] eal: keep per-lcore power intrinsics " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-20 8:49 ` [RFC v3 2/6] eal: add lcore variable test suite Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-20 8:49 ` [RFC v3 3/6] random: keep PRNG state in lcore variable Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-20 15:31 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-20 8:49 ` [RFC v3 4/6] power: keep per-lcore " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-20 8:49 ` [RFC v3 5/6] service: " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-22 9:42 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-23 10:19 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-20 8:49 ` [RFC v3 6/6] eal: keep per-lcore power intrinsics " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-19 9:40 ` [RFC v2 2/5] eal: add lcore variable test suite Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-19 9:40 ` [RFC v2 3/5] random: keep PRNG state in lcore variable Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-19 11:22 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-19 14:04 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-19 15:10 ` Morten Brørup
2024-02-19 9:40 ` [RFC v2 4/5] power: keep per-lcore " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-19 9:40 ` [RFC v2 5/5] service: " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-08 18:16 ` [RFC 2/5] eal: add lcore variable test suite Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-08 18:16 ` [RFC 3/5] random: keep PRNG state in lcore variable Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-08 18:16 ` [RFC 4/5] power: keep per-lcore " Mattias Rönnblom
2024-02-08 18:16 ` [RFC 5/5] service: " Mattias Rönnblom
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9F278@smartserver.smartshare.dk \
--to=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=hofors@lysator.liu.se \
--cc=mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).