* [dpdk-dev] [memnic PATCH] pmd: use memory barrier function instead of asm volatile
@ 2014-01-24 15:59 Olivier Matz
2014-01-30 11:42 ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Olivier Matz @ 2014-01-24 15:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dev
Use the DPDK specific function rte_mb() instead of
the GCC statement asm volatile ("" ::: "memory").
Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
common/memnic.h | 2 --
pmd/pmd_memnic.c | 6 +++---
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/memnic.h b/common/memnic.h
index 6ff38a0..fdc9fa3 100644
--- a/common/memnic.h
+++ b/common/memnic.h
@@ -123,8 +123,6 @@ struct memnic_area {
/* for userspace */
#define ACCESS_ONCE(x) (*(volatile typeof(x) *)&(x))
-#define barrier() do { asm volatile("": : :"memory"); } while (0)
-
static inline uint32_t cmpxchg(uint32_t *dst, uint32_t old, uint32_t new)
{
volatile uint32_t *ptr = (volatile uint32_t *)dst;
diff --git a/pmd/pmd_memnic.c b/pmd/pmd_memnic.c
index bc01746..1586222 100644
--- a/pmd/pmd_memnic.c
+++ b/pmd/pmd_memnic.c
@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ static int memnic_dev_start(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
/* invalidate */
adapter->nic->hdr.valid = 0;
- barrier();
+ rte_mb();
/* reset */
adapter->nic->hdr.reset = 1;
/* no need to wait here */
@@ -242,7 +242,7 @@ static uint16_t memnic_recv_pkts(void *rx_queue,
mb->pkt.data_len = p->len;
rx_pkts[nr] = mb;
- barrier();
+ rte_mb();
p->status = MEMNIC_PKT_ST_FREE;
if (++idx >= MEMNIC_NR_PACKET)
@@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ retry:
rte_memcpy(p->data, rte_pktmbuf_mtod(tx_pkts[nr], void *), len);
- barrier();
+ rte_mb();
p->status = MEMNIC_PKT_ST_FILLED;
rte_pktmbuf_free(tx_pkts[nr]);
--
1.8.4.rc3
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [memnic PATCH] pmd: use memory barrier function instead of asm volatile
2014-01-24 15:59 [dpdk-dev] [memnic PATCH] pmd: use memory barrier function instead of asm volatile Olivier Matz
@ 2014-01-30 11:42 ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2014-01-31 9:52 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-02-04 13:08 ` Thomas Monjalon
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Hiroshi Shimamoto @ 2014-01-30 11:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Olivier Matz, dev
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [memnic PATCH] pmd: use memory barrier function instead of asm volatile
>
> Use the DPDK specific function rte_mb() instead of
> the GCC statement asm volatile ("" ::: "memory").
Yes, that's preferred for DPDK, I think.
Looks okay to me.
By the way, I was also asked to use rte atomic function
instead of cmpxchg asm statement.
My re-submitted version in dpdk-ovs has such a change.
What do you think?
thanks,
Hiroshi
>
> Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> ---
> common/memnic.h | 2 --
> pmd/pmd_memnic.c | 6 +++---
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/common/memnic.h b/common/memnic.h
> index 6ff38a0..fdc9fa3 100644
> --- a/common/memnic.h
> +++ b/common/memnic.h
> @@ -123,8 +123,6 @@ struct memnic_area {
> /* for userspace */
> #define ACCESS_ONCE(x) (*(volatile typeof(x) *)&(x))
>
> -#define barrier() do { asm volatile("": : :"memory"); } while (0)
> -
> static inline uint32_t cmpxchg(uint32_t *dst, uint32_t old, uint32_t new)
> {
> volatile uint32_t *ptr = (volatile uint32_t *)dst;
> diff --git a/pmd/pmd_memnic.c b/pmd/pmd_memnic.c
> index bc01746..1586222 100644
> --- a/pmd/pmd_memnic.c
> +++ b/pmd/pmd_memnic.c
> @@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ static int memnic_dev_start(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
>
> /* invalidate */
> adapter->nic->hdr.valid = 0;
> - barrier();
> + rte_mb();
> /* reset */
> adapter->nic->hdr.reset = 1;
> /* no need to wait here */
> @@ -242,7 +242,7 @@ static uint16_t memnic_recv_pkts(void *rx_queue,
> mb->pkt.data_len = p->len;
> rx_pkts[nr] = mb;
>
> - barrier();
> + rte_mb();
> p->status = MEMNIC_PKT_ST_FREE;
>
> if (++idx >= MEMNIC_NR_PACKET)
> @@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ retry:
>
> rte_memcpy(p->data, rte_pktmbuf_mtod(tx_pkts[nr], void *), len);
>
> - barrier();
> + rte_mb();
> p->status = MEMNIC_PKT_ST_FILLED;
>
> rte_pktmbuf_free(tx_pkts[nr]);
> --
> 1.8.4.rc3
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [memnic PATCH] pmd: use memory barrier function instead of asm volatile
2014-01-30 11:42 ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
@ 2014-01-31 9:52 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-02-04 13:08 ` Thomas Monjalon
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Olivier MATZ @ 2014-01-31 9:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hiroshi Shimamoto; +Cc: dev
Hi Hiroshi-san,
On 01/30/2014 12:42 PM, Hiroshi Shimamoto wrote:
>> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [memnic PATCH] pmd: use memory barrier function instead of asm volatile
>
> By the way, I was also asked to use rte atomic function
> instead of cmpxchg asm statement.
> My re-submitted version in dpdk-ovs has such a change.
> What do you think?
Yes I agree about this change.
Regards,
Olivier
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [memnic PATCH] pmd: use memory barrier function instead of asm volatile
2014-01-30 11:42 ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2014-01-31 9:52 ` Olivier MATZ
@ 2014-02-04 13:08 ` Thomas Monjalon
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2014-02-04 13:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Olivier Matz; +Cc: dev
30/01/2014 12:42, Hiroshi Shimamoto:
> > Use the DPDK specific function rte_mb() instead of
> > the GCC statement asm volatile ("" ::: "memory").
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
>
> Yes, that's preferred for DPDK, I think.
> Looks okay to me.
Applied, thanks.
--
Thomas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-02-04 13:06 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-01-24 15:59 [dpdk-dev] [memnic PATCH] pmd: use memory barrier function instead of asm volatile Olivier Matz
2014-01-30 11:42 ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2014-01-31 9:52 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-02-04 13:08 ` Thomas Monjalon
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).