Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] rwlock: introduce 'try' semantics for RD and WR locking

["Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mattias Rönnblom [mailto:hofors@lysator.liu.se]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 10:28 AM
> To: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: nd <nd@arm.com>; Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) <Gavin.Hu@arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] rwlock: introduce 'try' semantics for RD and WR locking
> 
> On 2018-12-19 07:37, Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote:
> >> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map
> >> b/lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map
> >> index 3fe78260d..8b1593dd8 100644
> >> --- a/lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map
> >> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map
> >> @@ -355,6 +355,8 @@ EXPERIMENTAL {
> >>   	rte_mp_request_async;
> >>   	rte_mp_sendmsg;
> >>   	rte_option_register;
> >> +	rte_rwlock_read_trylock;
> >> +	rte_rwlock_write_trylock;
> > I do not see the other RW lock APIs in this file.
> >
> 
> They, just like those added, are static inline functions, will not
> result in any symbols in any shared objects and thus shouldn't be in any
> version.map file.

So, are you guys trying to say that there is no need to put these 'trylock'
functions into 'experimental' section?
Konstantin