From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EBCAA0C45; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 18:18:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AA37140DCE; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 18:18:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-pg1-f178.google.com (mail-pg1-f178.google.com [209.85.215.178]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B69740685 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 18:18:03 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-pg1-f178.google.com with SMTP id 32so5086702pgm.1 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 10:18:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5ep4bP28b9IrH3pCNoON6/lW2dip8reqq/T8SklGrxc=; b=bVG8VgG9vyPMT5VzkU5wi90pdFRv4Tvl/RcGk6KUtSbgE7Q3M5yQS7OooqCiY8bZPe q7XKdPmkgQOT3+ggURmiQTzIYia3i+X531upUPqaWRy9Q89jIqWI6sxk/L2UxBLsZ9Nt Uxc4mDLeVrX/51hTLbn3osla/84VfhPFpAsX7i5Ssqbk4KoTaIMHCNSJfpwAcrQc3pxO 6a4nPypkWVTuptlt3R/kTWwqMHF2oVb04sfzSD8fMXfECBeZT20ZmVV8jgA6ZKkFBurg RJ3pToOMXSLiHOxMbjnUs2Qncz28qlahQtUBRnub3Y52zCT2pK/DY3aWJNKfR2ZI2u14 W9tw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5ep4bP28b9IrH3pCNoON6/lW2dip8reqq/T8SklGrxc=; b=HMCm6n07f3d+BHB6fjZtbs3kqLvDnYy7/qugMCXmNE/huLWYfJt7oFukjmHWgFlnW/ DEdo+6vOjEGANhC6lYaA26yclwFaUhy+D8eb5mhQWpXDtFwEog4zsjLKTFNu6lR0lfhl 3XfWO0D5wy413PSAY4c8eTFEsaTYLSjjuTVa4SCTqiHHYhOYP+D7FJEHTuE/zSPF3r8M Lk9WT7MrhW+ajwSEjgpKGbVv3DWoPC3OzWCqYT9p3j+Nzds8/Cm0XGZ+n1qP3IBz4roZ 5g009E8gTMKLIZTkj5xxXqqR1bP5IIduaJxWn+g8b2+4BNcVDYM7r/Z8SIUk1gs7+es1 MvfA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531/T+iBcUNhmAg6EDU3aKbUaeOP7TJLKz/sC4wVU3joFjqVqWhB IzsBKMt21hodT4kMBSsz9df/Uw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzcsESbTN3bN57JYd1KW8LKQDBLIF2XTo86HhHG9sepDOmBY5AmH92KsrqLReT243OcVA5KGA== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:86c1:0:b029:203:900:2813 with SMTP id h1-20020aa786c10000b029020309002813mr13373226pfo.35.1616779082527; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 10:18:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.local (76-14-218-44.or.wavecable.com. [76.14.218.44]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r9sm9173996pgg.12.2021.03.26.10.18.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 26 Mar 2021 10:18:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 10:17:54 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> To: honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com, dev@dpdk.org Cc: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com> Message-ID: <20210326101754.091234ad@hermes.local> In-Reply-To: <20210303191945.94617-1-sthemmin@microsoft.com> References: <20210212013838.312623-1-sthemmin@microsoft.com> <20210303191945.94617-1-sthemmin@microsoft.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] pflock: implementation of phase-fair reader writer locks X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Wed, 3 Mar 2021 11:19:45 -0800 Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote: > This is a new type of reader-writer lock that provides better fairness > guarantees which makes it better for typical DPDK applications. > They lock internally uses two ticket pools, one for readers and one > for writers. > > Phase fair reader writer locks ensure that neither reader or writer will be > starved. Neither reader or writer are preferred, they execute in > alternating phases. All operations of the same time (reader or writer) > that try to acquire the lock are handled in FIFO order. Write > operations are exclusive, and multiple read operations can be run > together (until a write arrives). > > A similar implementation is in Concurrency Kit package in FreeBSD. > For more information see: > "Reader-Writer Synchronization for Shared-Memory Multiprocessor > Real-Time Systems", > http://www.cs.unc.edu/~anderson/papers/ecrts09b.pdf > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> Why has there been no review of this patch? The only complaint in patchwork is a bogus checkpatch warning about possible spelling error.