From: Tyler Retzlaff <roretzla@linux.microsoft.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org, mb@smartsharesystems.com,
Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com, Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com,
thomas@monjalon.net
Subject: rte_atomic API compatibility & standard atomics
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 12:39:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230327193915.GA2780@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> (raw)
Hi folks,
I don't think we discussed it specifically but what is the expectation
in relation to converting to standard atomics and compatibility of the
legacy rte_atomic APIs?
We can't really convert the inline function implementations of the
rte_atomic APIs because doing so would break compatibility. This is
because if the implementation uses standard atomics APIs then we are
required to pass _Atomic types to the generic atomic intrinsics.
We can choose to just leave the rte_atomic API implementations as they
are using the GCC builtins and i'm fine with that, but I do need some
help with what to do with msvc then since it doesn't have those
builtins.
The options seem to be as follows.
1.
Just cast the non-atomic types in the rte_atomic APIs implementation
to _Atomic which may work but i'm pretty sure is undefined behavior since
you can't qualify a non _Atomic type to suddenly be _Atomic.
2.
We could conditionally compile (hide) the legacy rte_atomic APIs when
msvc is in use, this seems not bad since there technically aren't any
Windows/MSVC consumers, but if someone wanted to port an existing
application they would have to adapt the code to avoid use of
rte_atomic.
For now I think the safest option is to go with 2 since it doesn't
impose any compatibility risk and conditional compilation only exists
until we deprecate and remove the old rte_atomic APIs.
Are there any other options i'm missing here?
Thanks
next reply other threads:[~2023-03-27 19:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-27 19:39 Tyler Retzlaff [this message]
2023-03-27 20:08 ` Morten Brørup
2023-03-28 18:46 ` Tyler Retzlaff
2023-03-29 8:43 ` Morten Brørup
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=20230327193915.GA2780@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net \
--to=roretzla@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com \
--cc=Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/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).