DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andre Muezerie <andremue@linux.microsoft.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com>,
	David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
	Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
	honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: add deprecation notice about limit on defer queue element size
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2025 07:37:47 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250710143747.GA24344@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4620749.daG60p0z9X@thomas>

On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 04:17:20PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 23/05/2025 01:37, Andre Muezerie:
> > The functions rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_create and rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_reclaim establish
> > no limit on the size of each element in the defer queue.
> 
> Very good, we need more unlimited API in DPDK.
> 
> > With DPDK 25.11 a hard limit will be set (``RTE_QSBR_ESIZE_MAX``).
> 
> I think it is a step in the wrong direction.
> I prefer having no limit.
> 
> > This will allow fixed C arrays to be used in the functions' implementations,
> > avoiding VLAs and use of alloca().
> 
> I don't understand this justification.
> Why trying to remove the 2 alloca() in the lib RCU?
> 

Only because other developer expressed concerns that using alloca() allows
ill-intended callers to cause a stack overflow.
I personally also prefer to have no hardcoded limits.

      reply	other threads:[~2025-07-10 14:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-05-22 23:37 Andre Muezerie
2025-07-01  7:56 ` David Marchand
2025-07-01 14:17 ` Thomas Monjalon
2025-07-10 14:37   ` Andre Muezerie [this message]

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=20250710143747.GA24344@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net \
    --to=andremue@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=konstantin.ananyev@huawei.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).