From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9737A462AC; Mon, 24 Feb 2025 17:22:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20FDD42686; Mon, 24 Feb 2025 17:22:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C35EB410D5 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2025 17:22:36 +0100 (CET) Received: by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix, from userid 1213) id 17D5520376FE; Mon, 24 Feb 2025 08:22:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com 17D5520376FE DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1740414156; bh=MRHoHTd5YZ6/H8GKOsQhTuKxM7qzK3sSs8HLm9NIh5E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=i6xu9lg9MGkwJUi/ZmviDrzpCkBhpL5suT+mIIJp29ZHO46pnY4rUwuZmdi1YIt6T 9GetXR73OtWKvwMqJImrUkHXDtXWJw0N3UVO78EyfvfuQuteO16s+VtGB32Mes0KDS DolU6P/grjJ+K6BL4q6P88Gi/uIkfeh041RdeiOk= Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 08:22:36 -0800 From: Andre Muezerie To: Morten =?iso-8859-1?Q?Br=F8rup?= Cc: konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com, dev@dpdk.org, Chengwen Feng Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 08/10] test-pmd: declare lcore_count atomic Message-ID: <20250224162236.GA11523@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> References: <1739311325-14425-1-git-send-email-andremue@linux.microsoft.com> <1740167563-12332-1-git-send-email-andremue@linux.microsoft.com> <1740167563-12332-9-git-send-email-andremue@linux.microsoft.com> <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9FA65@smartserver.smartshare.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9FA65@smartserver.smartshare.dk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 09:58:28PM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote: > > From: Andre Muezerie [mailto:andremue@linux.microsoft.com] > > Sent: Friday, 21 February 2025 20.53 > > > > Compiling with MSVC results in the error below: > > > > app/test/test_ring_perf.c(197): error C7712: address argument to atomic > > operation must be a pointer to an atomic integer, > > 'volatile unsigned int *' is not valid > > > > The fix is to mark lcore_count as atomic. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andre Muezerie > > Signed-off-by: Chengwen Feng > > --- > > app/test/test_ring_perf.c | 6 +----- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/app/test/test_ring_perf.c b/app/test/test_ring_perf.c > > index 57cd04a124..921aa902c5 100644 > > --- a/app/test/test_ring_perf.c > > +++ b/app/test/test_ring_perf.c > > @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ struct lcore_pair { > > unsigned c1, c2; > > }; > > > > -static volatile unsigned lcore_count = 0; > > +static volatile RTE_ATOMIC(unsigned int) lcore_count; > > Using rte_atomic_xxx to access the RTE_ATOMIC qualified lcore_count seems more clean than making it volatile and sometimes access it non-atomically. > It is only accessed two more times, so not a big change. > > Anyway, this could just be my personal preference. No change required if you disagree. Makes sense. I'll send an updated series.