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 09EE745522;
Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:05:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6A84410D3;
Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:05:25 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-qv1-f43.google.com (mail-qv1-f43.google.com
[209.85.219.43]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 714AC4029E
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:05:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-qv1-f43.google.com with SMTP id
6a1803df08f44-6b553b1a159so1959456d6.0
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 03:05:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=bytedance.com; s=google; t=1719569123; x=1720173923; darn=dpdk.org;
h=user-agent:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding
:content-disposition:mime-version:references:mail-followup-to
:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date
:message-id:reply-to;
bh=oh28CIxgWeZS5UK32EGQHax1fGLTpPeAXXStIp8xoeQ=;
b=XAcsy/WXNbsa2kc9BsSeKanLUe4fp3guXpGPP2ftoU6P2FZ8COTv97wsKTawi3JPQh
6lN4GInVBnl8zV7/7Y6FGHD29l/mNg2Zz8IOgY62SECVAMKKvqXoLuIS4SJzSN6wTRID
sUtwPmajjucxTXg7VmLeVNTfu67RCxnSvNyAkgpPaheRomKz2A9KpFRuzLTtfT6r2d4o
z/0vTKX3cDhjeSzVumV7zfooaHZOQ6U7xjeCeoxzx4StTkiZNtePspeNl1u7EqZKGjzb
qFE4VIzERZxuU4foO8yIefBi5wOJBZ2hRRo7FGrpL42rG9Bcvt3in7A1NJ3e9WD3b7NE
+63g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1719569123; x=1720173923;
h=user-agent:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding
:content-disposition:mime-version:references:mail-followup-to
:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc
:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=oh28CIxgWeZS5UK32EGQHax1fGLTpPeAXXStIp8xoeQ=;
b=Nzj1K8UD+8Hb8ZEIuLMfXUb1MgbyPKZ9QW4yKzkGLY8hFsxMlpQgdIbew+TgLHP9+Q
zhI7y3UDprbodEh9ifvZIN2L32MVeWfGM29w6vdNQj8d8ZpfyNQCha+GU4dB7BRbVKd0
EALAwb8whyPoq5y3Zf469lEOBw+voNq4sW0kd1+WljelnCUw2ztG1ZNGUK0VVEXrW+DN
7zKn1xoE5IyXPkiwyMOSf2Q157oVYBvrbblF/gOZATvKgXnwO1Cj+TtBD97WjkLYVKnq
Ds5qCHYo6mU4LZEA0xq0RySv/1qwJZwhDT4sACIQmz7+l6dR0aM2zFeegHdkJO1/7ARl
Mn2w==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCVqaf+TLJR9YT2F0YESH47hLlhS1/BAv3URkJjAT49FVro9sRZ3lLiFawxyVOOR56T67wshgKLf0t/Rurs=
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw4xLpJ8yC9G1HRfg+8m9K/qytAWa7ARMbvkmnR2VZrAHakHVng
ydit2ElanbSuR+5h2PxCvJ3HP8DQc47t5c3n2v277BBaoFx7iPIwr5ncAnapUvk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHsliU3oWlVYZJ8VZBbhNcbpCZ9a0Yp0hvxqzmrbm0w+dtRAf7BUyOzBK4Z4JDyrqXnkcWoHg==
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:9ccd:0:b0:6b0:90d8:b698 with SMTP id
6a1803df08f44-6b540aaa89cmr169022656d6.45.1719569123611;
Fri, 28 Jun 2024 03:05:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ste-uk-lab-gw ([93.115.195.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
6a1803df08f44-6b59e563230sm6596346d6.35.2024.06.28.03.05.22
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Fri, 28 Jun 2024 03:05:23 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:05:20 +0100
From: Daniel Gregory <daniel.gregory@bytedance.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>, dev@dpdk.org,
Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@bytedance.com>,
Liang Ma <liangma@bytedance.com>, feifei.wang2@arm.com,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>, david.marchand@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] eal/arm: replace RTE_BUILD_BUG on non-constant
Message-ID: <20240628100520.GA3779302@ste-uk-lab-gw>
Mail-Followup-To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>, dev@dpdk.org,
Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@bytedance.com>,
Liang Ma <liangma@bytedance.com>, feifei.wang2@arm.com,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
david.marchand@redhat.com
References: <20240502142116.63760-1-daniel.gregory@bytedance.com>
<20240503182730.31693-1-daniel.gregory@bytedance.com>
<20240503175905.28c590cf@hermes.local> <6615976.zIJbB62Pao@thomas>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <6615976.zIJbB62Pao@thomas>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
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
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 05:08:51PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 04/05/2024 02:59, Stephen Hemminger:
> > On Fri, 3 May 2024 19:27:30 +0100
> > Daniel Gregory <daniel.gregory@bytedance.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The ARM implementation of rte_pause uses RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON to check
> > > memorder, which is not constant. This causes compile errors when it is
> > > enabled with RTE_ARM_USE_WFE. eg.
> > >
> > > ../lib/eal/arm/include/rte_pause_64.h: In function ‘rte_wait_until_equal_16’:
> > > ../lib/eal/include/rte_common.h:530:56: error: expression in static assertion is not constant
> > > 530 | #define RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(condition) do { static_assert(!(condition), #condition); } while (0)
> > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > ../lib/eal/arm/include/rte_pause_64.h:156:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON’
> > > 156 | RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(memorder != rte_memory_order_acquire &&
> > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >
> > > Fix the compile errors by replacing the check with an assert, like in
> > > the generic implementation (lib/eal/include/generic/rte_pause.h).
> >
> > No, don't hide the problem.
> >
> > What code is calling these. Looks like a real bug. Could be behind layers of wrappers.
>
> I support Stephen's opinion.
> Please look for the real issue.
In DPDK, I have found 26 calls of rte_wait_until_equal_16, largely split
between app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c and app/test/test_timer.c, with
a couple calls in lib/eal/include/rte_pflock.h and
lib/eal/include/rte_ticketlock.h as well. 16 calls of
rte_wait_until_equal_32, spread amongst various test cases
(test_func_reentrancy.c test_mcslock.c, test_mempool_perf.c, ...), two
drivers (drivers/event/opdl/opdl_ring.c and
drivers/net/thunderx/nicvf_rxrx.c), lib/eal/common/eal_common_mcfg.c,
lib/eal/include/generic/rte_spinlock.h, lib/ring/rte_ring_c11_pvt.h,
lib/ring/rte_ring_generic_pvt.h and lib/eal/include/rte_mcslock.h. There
is a single call to rte_wait_until_equal_64 in app/test/test_pmd_perf.c
They all correctly use the primitives from rte_stdatomic.h
As I discussed on another chain
https://lore.kernel.org/dpdk-dev/20240509110251.GA3795959@ste-uk-lab-gw/
from what I've seen, it seems that neither Clang nor GCC allow for
static checks on the parameters of inline functions. For instance, the
following does not compile:
static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) int
fn(int val)
{
_Static_assert(val == 0, "val nonzero");
return 0;
}
int main(void) {
return fn(0);
}
( https://godbolt.org/z/TrfWqYoGo )
With the same "expression in static assertion is not constant" error
that I get when cross-compiling DPDK for ARM with WFE enabled on main:
diff --git a/config/arm/meson.build b/config/arm/meson.build
index a45aa9e466..661c735977 100644
--- a/config/arm/meson.build
+++ b/config/arm/meson.build
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ flags_common = [
# ['RTE_ARM64_MEMCPY_STRICT_ALIGN', false],
# Enable use of ARM wait for event instruction.
- # ['RTE_ARM_USE_WFE', false],
+ ['RTE_ARM_USE_WFE', true],
['RTE_ARCH_ARM64', true],
['RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE', 128]