DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Van Haaren, Harry" <harry.van.haaren@intel.com>
To: "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
	"Wang, Yipeng1" <yipeng1.wang@intel.com>
Cc: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>,
	"De Lara Guarch, Pablo" <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
	"gavin.hu@arm.com" <gavin.hu@arm.com>,
	"steve.capper@arm.com" <steve.capper@arm.com>,
	"ola.liljedahl@arm.com" <ola.liljedahl@arm.com>,
	"nd@arm.com" <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/4] hash: fix rw concurrency while moving	keys
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 08:55:25 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <E923DB57A917B54B9182A2E928D00FA65E2E0E47@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180928082610.GA7592@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Richardson
> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 9:26 AM
> To: Wang, Yipeng1 <yipeng1.wang@intel.com>
> Cc: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>; De Lara Guarch,
> Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org; gavin.hu@arm.com;
> steve.capper@arm.com; ola.liljedahl@arm.com; nd@arm.com
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/4] hash: fix rw concurrency while moving
> keys
> 
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 02:00:00AM +0100, Wang, Yipeng1 wrote:
> > Reply inlined:
> >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Honnappa Nagarahalli
> > >Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2018 10:12 AM
> > >To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
> > >Cc: dev@dpdk.org; honnappa.nagarahalli@dpdk.org; gavin.hu@arm.com;
> steve.capper@arm.com; ola.liljedahl@arm.com;
> > >nd@arm.com; Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
> > >Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/4] hash: fix rw concurrency while moving
> keys
> > >
> > >Reader-writer concurrency issue, caused by moving the keys
> > >to their alternative locations during key insert, is solved
> > >by introducing a global counter(tbl_chng_cnt) indicating a
> > >change in table.

<snip>

> > > /**
> > >@@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ rte_hash_add_key_with_hash_data(const struct rte_hash
> *h, const void *key,
> > >  *     array of user data. This value is unique for this key.
> > >  */
> > > int32_t
> > >-rte_hash_add_key(const struct rte_hash *h, const void *key);
> > >+rte_hash_add_key(struct rte_hash *h, const void *key);
> > >
> > > /**
> > >  * Add a key to an existing hash table.
> > >@@ -222,7 +222,7 @@ rte_hash_add_key(const struct rte_hash *h, const void
> *key);
> > >  *     array of user data. This value is unique for this key.
> > >  */
> > > int32_t
> > >-rte_hash_add_key_with_hash(const struct rte_hash *h, const void *key,
> hash_sig_t sig);
> > >+rte_hash_add_key_with_hash(struct rte_hash *h, const void *key,
> hash_sig_t sig);
> > >
> > > /
> >
> > I think the above changes will break ABI by changing the parameter type?
> Other people may know better on this.
> 
> Just removing a const should not change the ABI, I believe, since the const
> is just advisory hint to the compiler. Actual parameter size and count
> remains unchanged so I don't believe there is an issue.
> [ABI experts, please correct me if I'm wrong on this]


[Certainly no ABI expert, but...]

I think this is an API break, not ABI break.

Given application code as follows, it will fail to compile - even though
running the new code as a .so wouldn't cause any issues (AFAIK).

void do_hash_stuff(const struct rte_hash *h, ...)
{
    /* parameter passed in is const, but updated function prototype is non-const */
    rte_hash_add_key_with_hash(h, ...);
}

This means that we can't recompile apps against latest patch without application
code changes, if the app was passing a const rte_hash struct as the first parameter.


-Harry

  reply	other threads:[~2018-09-28  8:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-09-06 17:12 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/4] Address reader-writer concurrency in rte_hash Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-09-06 17:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/4] hash: correct key store element alignment Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-09-27 23:58   ` Wang, Yipeng1
2018-09-06 17:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/4] hash: add memory ordering to avoid race conditions Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-09-28  0:43   ` Wang, Yipeng1
2018-09-30 22:20     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-10-01 22:41       ` Wang, Yipeng1
2018-10-01 10:42     ` Ola Liljedahl
2018-10-02  1:52       ` Wang, Yipeng1
2018-09-06 17:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/4] hash: fix rw concurrency while moving keys Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-09-28  1:00   ` Wang, Yipeng1
2018-09-28  8:26     ` Bruce Richardson
2018-09-28  8:55       ` Van Haaren, Harry [this message]
2018-09-30 22:33         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-10-02 13:17           ` Van Haaren, Harry
2018-10-02 23:58             ` Wang, Yipeng1
2018-10-03 17:32               ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-10-03 17:56                 ` Wang, Yipeng1
2018-10-03 23:05                   ` Ola Liljedahl
2018-10-04  3:32                   ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-10-04  3:54                 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-10-04 19:16                   ` Wang, Yipeng1
2018-09-30 23:05     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-10-01 22:56       ` Wang, Yipeng1
2018-10-03  0:16       ` Wang, Yipeng1
2018-10-03 17:39         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-09-06 17:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/4] hash: enable lock-free reader-writer concurrency Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-09-28  1:33   ` Wang, Yipeng1
2018-10-01  4:11     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-10-01 23:54       ` Wang, Yipeng1
2018-10-11  5:24         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-09-14 21:18 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/4] Address reader-writer concurrency in rte_hash Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-09-26 14:36   ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-09-27 23:45 ` Wang, Yipeng1
2018-09-28 21:11   ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2018-10-02  0:30     ` Wang, Yipeng1

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=E923DB57A917B54B9182A2E928D00FA65E2E0E47@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com \
    --to=harry.van.haaren@intel.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=gavin.hu@arm.com \
    --cc=honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=nd@arm.com \
    --cc=ola.liljedahl@arm.com \
    --cc=pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com \
    --cc=steve.capper@arm.com \
    --cc=yipeng1.wang@intel.com \
    /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).