From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DF40A00C5; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 12:43:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E79801D5D8; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 12:43:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay8-d.mail.gandi.net (relay8-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.201]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F6421D5D7 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 12:43:07 +0200 (CEST) X-Originating-IP: 86.246.31.132 Received: from u256.net (lfbn-idf2-1-566-132.w86-246.abo.wanadoo.fr [86.246.31.132]) (Authenticated sender: grive@u256.net) by relay8-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B9F211BF203; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 10:43:05 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 12:43:00 +0200 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ga=C3=ABtan?= Rivet To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20200605104247.kilea5nfktlf7mlm@u256.net> References: <20200604210200.25405-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20200604180409.4a2831c3@hermes.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20200604180409.4a2831c3@hermes.lan> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] replace master/slave with primary/secondary X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 04/06/20 18:04 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > I have a full patch that replaces the master/slave lcore > naming (widely used in DPDK) with a better primary/secondary naming. > > For now this is just a trial balloon to see what the impact would > look like. The change mostly automated so likely that things > are broken. > > It is hard to break a change like this down, and still > keep git bisection clean. > > It keeps rte_master_lcore_id and RTE_FOREACH_SLAVE as deprecated > items so that user code can still be built but they will be motivated > to change. > > Here is a sample of what it would look like: > I think PRIMARY is a poor choice to describe the control thread. PRIMARY is often used to designate the active element currently doing the work. SECONDARY threads are also active threads doing equal dataplane work. Another issue I see with primary / secondary is the ambiguity with multi-process in DPDK. Doc readers could get confused about where a primary / secondary thread is executed. I think we could use instead DPDK-specific terminology. The lcore organization is a little specific, with an lcore that does most init work and spawns the others, but then runs the application like all others. I'd propose instead leader lcore - there is this idea that the leader is still a member of the team and will participate in the work. Leader / worker? -- Gaëtan