DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
To: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>,
	"stephen@networkplumber.org" <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
	"paulmck@linux.ibm.com" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: "Wang, Yipeng1" <yipeng1.wang@intel.com>,
	"Medvedkin, Vladimir" <vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com>,
	"ruifeng.wang@arm.com" <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>,
	"dharmik.thakkar@arm.com" <dharmik.thakkar@arm.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "nd@arm.com" <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] lib/rcu: add resource reclamation APIs
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 17:39:44 +0000
Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258019196FF8E@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191001062917.35578-3-honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>

Hi Honnappa,

 
> Add resource reclamation APIs to make it simple for applications
> and libraries to integrate rte_rcu library.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Ola Liljedhal <ola.liljedhal@arm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>
> ---
>  app/test/test_rcu_qsbr.c           | 291 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  lib/librte_rcu/meson.build         |   2 +
>  lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr.c      | 185 ++++++++++++++++++
>  lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr.h      | 169 +++++++++++++++++
>  lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr_pvt.h  |  46 +++++
>  lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_version.map |   4 +
>  lib/meson.build                    |   6 +-
>  7 files changed, 700 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr_pvt.h
> 
> diff --git a/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr.c b/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr.c
> index ce7f93dd3..76814f50b 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr.c
> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>  #include <rte_errno.h>
> 
>  #include "rte_rcu_qsbr.h"
> +#include "rte_rcu_qsbr_pvt.h"
> 
>  /* Get the memory size of QSBR variable */
>  size_t
> @@ -267,6 +268,190 @@ rte_rcu_qsbr_dump(FILE *f, struct rte_rcu_qsbr *v)
>  	return 0;
>  }
> 
> +/* Create a queue used to store the data structure elements that can
> + * be freed later. This queue is referred to as 'defer queue'.
> + */
> +struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq *
> +rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_create(const struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_parameters *params)
> +{
> +	struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq *dq;
> +	uint32_t qs_fifo_size;
> +
> +	if (params == NULL || params->f == NULL ||
> +		params->v == NULL || params->name == NULL ||
> +		params->size == 0 || params->esize == 0 ||
> +		(params->esize % 8 != 0)) {
> +		rte_log(RTE_LOG_ERR, rte_rcu_log_type,
> +			"%s(): Invalid input parameter\n", __func__);
> +		rte_errno = EINVAL;
> +
> +		return NULL;
> +	}
> +
> +	dq = rte_zmalloc(NULL,
> +		(sizeof(struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq) + params->esize),
> +		RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE);
> +	if (dq == NULL) {
> +		rte_errno = ENOMEM;
> +
> +		return NULL;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* round up qs_fifo_size to next power of two that is not less than
> +	 * max_size.
> +	 */
> +	qs_fifo_size = rte_align32pow2((((params->esize/8) + 1)
> +					* params->size) + 1);
> +	dq->r = rte_ring_create(params->name, qs_fifo_size,
> +					SOCKET_ID_ANY, 0);

If it is going to be not MT safe, then why not to create the ring with
(RING_F_SP_ENQ | RING_F_SC_DEQ) flags set?
Though I think it could be changed to allow MT safe multiple
enqeue/single dequeue, see below.

> +	if (dq->r == NULL) {
> +		rte_log(RTE_LOG_ERR, rte_rcu_log_type,
> +			"%s(): defer queue create failed\n", __func__);
> +		rte_free(dq);
> +		return NULL;
> +	}
> +
> +	dq->v = params->v;
> +	dq->size = params->size;
> +	dq->esize = params->esize;
> +	dq->f = params->f;
> +	dq->p = params->p;
> +
> +	return dq;
> +}
> +
> +/* Enqueue one resource to the defer queue to free after the grace
> + * period is over.
> + */
> +int rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_enqueue(struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq *dq, void *e)
> +{
> +	uint64_t token;
> +	uint64_t *tmp;
> +	uint32_t i;
> +	uint32_t cur_size, free_size;
> +
> +	if (dq == NULL || e == NULL) {
> +		rte_log(RTE_LOG_ERR, rte_rcu_log_type,
> +			"%s(): Invalid input parameter\n", __func__);
> +		rte_errno = EINVAL;
> +
> +		return 1;

Why just not to return -EINVAL straightway?
I think there is no much point to set rte_errno in that function at all,
just return value should do.

> +	}
> +
> +	/* Start the grace period */
> +	token = rte_rcu_qsbr_start(dq->v);
> +
> +	/* Reclaim resources if the queue is 1/8th full. This helps
> +	 * the queue from growing too large and allows time for reader
> +	 * threads to report their quiescent state.
> +	 */
> +	cur_size = rte_ring_count(dq->r) / (dq->esize/8 + 1);

Probably would be a bit easier if you just store in dq->esize (elt size + token size) / 8.

> +	if (cur_size > (dq->size >> RTE_RCU_QSBR_AUTO_RECLAIM_LIMIT)) {

Why to make this threshold value hard-coded?
Why either not to put it into create parameter, or just return a special return value,
to indicate that threshold is reached?
Or even return number of filled/free entroes on success, so caller can decide
to reclaim or not based on that information on his own?

> +		rte_log(RTE_LOG_INFO, rte_rcu_log_type,
> +			"%s(): Triggering reclamation\n", __func__);
> +		rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_reclaim(dq);
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Check if there is space for atleast for 1 resource */
> +	free_size = rte_ring_free_count(dq->r) / (dq->esize/8 + 1);
> +	if (!free_size) {
> +		rte_log(RTE_LOG_ERR, rte_rcu_log_type,
> +			"%s(): Defer queue is full\n", __func__);
> +		rte_errno = ENOSPC;
> +		return 1;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Enqueue the resource */
> +	rte_ring_sp_enqueue(dq->r, (void *)(uintptr_t)token);
> +
> +	/* The resource to enqueue needs to be a multiple of 64b
> +	 * due to the limitation of the rte_ring implementation.
> +	 */
> +	for (i = 0, tmp = (uint64_t *)e; i < dq->esize/8; i++, tmp++)
> +		rte_ring_sp_enqueue(dq->r, (void *)(uintptr_t)*tmp);


That whole construction above looks a bit clumsy and error prone...
I suppose just:

const uint32_t nb_elt =  dq->elt_size/8 + 1;
uint32_t free, n;
...
n = rte_ring_enqueue_bulk(dq->r, e, nb_elt, &free);
if (n == 0)
  return -ENOSPC;
return free;

That way I think you can have MT-safe version of that function.

> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/* Reclaim resources from the defer queue. */
> +int
> +rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_reclaim(struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq *dq)
> +{
> +	uint32_t max_cnt;
> +	uint32_t cnt;
> +	void *token;
> +	uint64_t *tmp;
> +	uint32_t i;
> +
> +	if (dq == NULL) {
> +		rte_log(RTE_LOG_ERR, rte_rcu_log_type,
> +			"%s(): Invalid input parameter\n", __func__);
> +		rte_errno = EINVAL;
> +
> +		return 1;

Same story as above - I think rte_errno is excessive in this function.
Just return value should be enough.


> +	}
> +
> +	/* Anything to reclaim? */
> +	if (rte_ring_count(dq->r) == 0)
> +		return 0;

Not sure you need that, see below.

> +
> +	/* Reclaim at the max 1/16th the total number of entries. */
> +	max_cnt = dq->size >> RTE_RCU_QSBR_MAX_RECLAIM_LIMIT;
> +	max_cnt = (max_cnt == 0) ? dq->size : max_cnt;

Again why not to make max_cnt a configurable at create() parameter?
Or even a parameter for that function?

> +	cnt = 0;
> +
> +	/* Check reader threads quiescent state and reclaim resources */
> +	while ((cnt < max_cnt) && (rte_ring_peek(dq->r, &token) == 0) &&
> +		(rte_rcu_qsbr_check(dq->v, (uint64_t)((uintptr_t)token), false)
> +			== 1)) {


> +		(void)rte_ring_sc_dequeue(dq->r, &token);
> +		/* The resource to dequeue needs to be a multiple of 64b
> +		 * due to the limitation of the rte_ring implementation.
> +		 */
> +		for (i = 0, tmp = (uint64_t *)dq->e; i < dq->esize/8;
> +			i++, tmp++)
> +			(void)rte_ring_sc_dequeue(dq->r,
> +					(void *)(uintptr_t)tmp);

Again, no need for such constructs with multiple dequeuer I believe.
Just:

const uint32_t nb_elt =  dq->elt_size/8 + 1;
uint32_t n;
uintptr_t elt[nb_elt];
...
n = rte_ring_dequeue_bulk(dq->r, elt, nb_elt, NULL);
if (n != 0) {dq->f(dq->p, elt);}

Seems enough.
Again in that case you can have enqueue/reclaim running in
different threads simultaneously, plus you don't need dq->e at all. 

> +		dq->f(dq->p, dq->e);
> +
> +		cnt++;
> +	}
> +
> +	rte_log(RTE_LOG_INFO, rte_rcu_log_type,
> +		"%s(): Reclaimed %u resources\n", __func__, cnt);
> +
> +	if (cnt == 0) {
> +		/* No resources were reclaimed */
> +		rte_errno = EAGAIN;
> +		return 1;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;

I'd suggest to return cnt on success.

> +}
> +
> +/* Delete a defer queue. */
> +int
> +rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_delete(struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq *dq)
> +{
> +	if (dq == NULL) {
> +		rte_log(RTE_LOG_ERR, rte_rcu_log_type,
> +			"%s(): Invalid input parameter\n", __func__);
> +		rte_errno = EINVAL;
> +
> +		return 1;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Reclaim all the resources */
> +	if (rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_reclaim(dq) != 0)
> +		/* Error number is already set by the reclaim API */
> +		return 1;

How do you know that you have reclaimed everything?

> +
> +	rte_ring_free(dq->r);
> +	rte_free(dq);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  int rte_rcu_log_type;
> 
>  RTE_INIT(rte_rcu_register)
> diff --git a/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr.h b/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr.h
> index c80f15c00..185d4b50a 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr.h
> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ extern "C" {
>  #include <rte_lcore.h>
>  #include <rte_debug.h>
>  #include <rte_atomic.h>
> +#include <rte_ring.h>
> 
>  extern int rte_rcu_log_type;
> 
> @@ -109,6 +110,67 @@ struct rte_rcu_qsbr {
>  	 */
>  } __rte_cache_aligned;
> 
> +/**
> + * Call back function called to free the resources.
> + *
> + * @param p
> + *   Pointer provided while creating the defer queue
> + * @param e
> + *   Pointer to the resource data stored on the defer queue
> + *
> + * @return
> + *   None
> + */
> +typedef void (*rte_rcu_qsbr_free_resource)(void *p, void *e);

Stylish thing - usually in DPDK we have typedf newtype_t ...
Though I am not sure you need a new typedef at all - just 
a function pointer inside the struct seems enough.

> +
> +#define RTE_RCU_QSBR_DQ_NAMESIZE RTE_RING_NAMESIZE
> +
> +/**
> + *  Trigger automatic reclamation after 1/8th the defer queue is full.
> + */
> +#define RTE_RCU_QSBR_AUTO_RECLAIM_LIMIT 3
> +
> +/**
> + *  Reclaim at the max 1/16th the total number of resources.
> + */
> +#define RTE_RCU_QSBR_MAX_RECLAIM_LIMIT 4


As I said above, I don't think these thresholds need to be hardcoded.
In any case, there seems not much point to put them in the public header file.

> +
> +/**
> + * Parameters used when creating the defer queue.
> + */
> +struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_parameters {
> +	const char *name;
> +	/**< Name of the queue. */
> +	uint32_t size;
> +	/**< Number of entries in queue. Typically, this will be
> +	 *   the same as the maximum number of entries supported in the
> +	 *   lock free data structure.
> +	 *   Data structures with unbounded number of entries is not
> +	 *   supported currently.
> +	 */
> +	uint32_t esize;
> +	/**< Size (in bytes) of each element in the defer queue.
> +	 *   This has to be multiple of 8B as the rte_ring APIs
> +	 *   support 8B element sizes only.
> +	 */
> +	rte_rcu_qsbr_free_resource f;
> +	/**< Function to call to free the resource. */
> +	void *p;

Style nit again - I like short names myself, but that seems a bit extreme... :)
Might be at least:
void (*reclaim)(void *, void *);
void * reclaim_data;
?

> +	/**< Pointer passed to the free function. Typically, this is the
> +	 *   pointer to the data structure to which the resource to free
> +	 *   belongs. This can be NULL.
> +	 */
> +	struct rte_rcu_qsbr *v;

Does it need to be inside that struct?
Might be better:
rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_create(struct rte_rcu_qsbr *v, const struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_parameters *params);

Another alternative: make both reclaim() and enqueue() to take v as a parameter.

> +	/**< RCU QSBR variable to use for this defer queue */
> +};
> +
> +/* RTE defer queue structure.
> + * This structure holds the defer queue. The defer queue is used to
> + * hold the deleted entries from the data structure that are not
> + * yet freed.
> + */
> +struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq;
> +
>  /**
>   * @warning
>   * @b EXPERIMENTAL: this API may change without prior notice
> @@ -648,6 +710,113 @@ __rte_experimental
>  int
>  rte_rcu_qsbr_dump(FILE *f, struct rte_rcu_qsbr *v);
> 
> +/**
> + * @warning
> + * @b EXPERIMENTAL: this API may change without prior notice
> + *
> + * Create a queue used to store the data structure elements that can
> + * be freed later. This queue is referred to as 'defer queue'.
> + *
> + * @param params
> + *   Parameters to create a defer queue.
> + * @return
> + *   On success - Valid pointer to defer queue
> + *   On error - NULL
> + *   Possible rte_errno codes are:
> + *   - EINVAL - NULL parameters are passed
> + *   - ENOMEM - Not enough memory
> + */
> +__rte_experimental
> +struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq *
> +rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_create(const struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_parameters *params);
> +
> +/**
> + * @warning
> + * @b EXPERIMENTAL: this API may change without prior notice
> + *
> + * Enqueue one resource to the defer queue and start the grace period.
> + * The resource will be freed later after at least one grace period
> + * is over.
> + *
> + * If the defer queue is full, it will attempt to reclaim resources.
> + * It will also reclaim resources at regular intervals to avoid
> + * the defer queue from growing too big.
> + *
> + * This API is not multi-thread safe. It is expected that the caller
> + * provides multi-thread safety by locking a mutex or some other means.
> + *
> + * A lock free multi-thread writer algorithm could achieve multi-thread
> + * safety by creating and using one defer queue per thread.
> + *
> + * @param dq
> + *   Defer queue to allocate an entry from.
> + * @param e
> + *   Pointer to resource data to copy to the defer queue. The size of
> + *   the data to copy is equal to the element size provided when the
> + *   defer queue was created.
> + * @return
> + *   On success - 0
> + *   On error - 1 with rte_errno set to
> + *   - EINVAL - NULL parameters are passed
> + *   - ENOSPC - Defer queue is full. This condition can not happen
> + *		if the defer queue size is equal (or larger) than the
> + *		number of elements in the data structure.
> + */
> +__rte_experimental
> +int
> +rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_enqueue(struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq *dq, void *e);
> +
> +/**
> + * @warning
> + * @b EXPERIMENTAL: this API may change without prior notice
> + *
> + * Reclaim resources from the defer queue.
> + *
> + * This API is not multi-thread safe. It is expected that the caller
> + * provides multi-thread safety by locking a mutex or some other means.
> + *
> + * A lock free multi-thread writer algorithm could achieve multi-thread
> + * safety by creating and using one defer queue per thread.
> + *
> + * @param dq
> + *   Defer queue to reclaim an entry from.
> + * @return
> + *   On successful reclamation of at least 1 resource - 0
> + *   On error - 1 with rte_errno set to
> + *   - EINVAL - NULL parameters are passed
> + *   - EAGAIN - None of the resources have completed at least 1 grace period,
> + *		try again.
> + */
> +__rte_experimental
> +int
> +rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_reclaim(struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq *dq);
> +
> +/**
> + * @warning
> + * @b EXPERIMENTAL: this API may change without prior notice
> + *
> + * Delete a defer queue.
> + *
> + * It tries to reclaim all the resources on the defer queue.
> + * If any of the resources have not completed the grace period
> + * the reclamation stops and returns immediately. The rest of
> + * the resources are not reclaimed and the defer queue is not
> + * freed.
> + *
> + * @param dq
> + *   Defer queue to delete.
> + * @return
> + *   On success - 0
> + *   On error - 1
> + *   Possible rte_errno codes are:
> + *   - EINVAL - NULL parameters are passed
> + *   - EAGAIN - Some of the resources have not completed at least 1 grace
> + *		period, try again.
> + */
> +__rte_experimental
> +int
> +rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_delete(struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq *dq);
> +
>  #ifdef __cplusplus
>  }
>  #endif
> diff --git a/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr_pvt.h b/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr_pvt.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000..2122bc36a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_qsbr_pvt.h

Again style suggestion: as it is not public header - don't use rte_ prefix for naming.
From my perspective - easier to relalize for reader what is public header, what is not.

> @@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
> + * Copyright (c) 2019 Arm Limited
> + */
> +
> +#ifndef _RTE_RCU_QSBR_PVT_H_
> +#define _RTE_RCU_QSBR_PVT_H_
> +
> +/**
> + * This file is private to the RCU library. It should not be included
> + * by the user of this library.
> + */
> +
> +#ifdef __cplusplus
> +extern "C" {
> +#endif
> +
> +#include "rte_rcu_qsbr.h"
> +
> +/* RTE defer queue structure.
> + * This structure holds the defer queue. The defer queue is used to
> + * hold the deleted entries from the data structure that are not
> + * yet freed.
> + */
> +struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq {
> +	struct rte_rcu_qsbr *v; /**< RCU QSBR variable used by this queue.*/
> +	struct rte_ring *r;     /**< RCU QSBR defer queue. */
> +	uint32_t size;
> +	/**< Number of elements in the defer queue */
> +	uint32_t esize;
> +	/**< Size (in bytes) of data stored on the defer queue */
> +	rte_rcu_qsbr_free_resource f;
> +	/**< Function to call to free the resource. */
> +	void *p;
> +	/**< Pointer passed to the free function. Typically, this is the
> +	 *   pointer to the data structure to which the resource to free
> +	 *   belongs.
> +	 */
> +	char e[0];
> +	/**< Temporary storage to copy the defer queue element. */

Do you really need 'e' at all?
Can't it be just temporary stack variable?

> +};
> +
> +#ifdef __cplusplus
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> +#endif /* _RTE_RCU_QSBR_PVT_H_ */
> diff --git a/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_version.map b/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_version.map
> index f8b9ef2ab..dfac88a37 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_version.map
> +++ b/lib/librte_rcu/rte_rcu_version.map
> @@ -8,6 +8,10 @@ EXPERIMENTAL {
>  	rte_rcu_qsbr_synchronize;
>  	rte_rcu_qsbr_thread_register;
>  	rte_rcu_qsbr_thread_unregister;
> +	rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_create;
> +	rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_enqueue;
> +	rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_reclaim;
> +	rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_delete;
> 
>  	local: *;
>  };
> diff --git a/lib/meson.build b/lib/meson.build
> index e5ff83893..0e1be8407 100644
> --- a/lib/meson.build
> +++ b/lib/meson.build
> @@ -11,7 +11,9 @@
>  libraries = [
>  	'kvargs', # eal depends on kvargs
>  	'eal', # everything depends on eal
> -	'ring', 'mempool', 'mbuf', 'net', 'meter', 'ethdev', 'pci', # core
> +	'ring',
> +	'rcu', # rcu depends on ring
> +	'mempool', 'mbuf', 'net', 'meter', 'ethdev', 'pci', # core
>  	'cmdline',
>  	'metrics', # bitrate/latency stats depends on this
>  	'hash',    # efd depends on this
> @@ -22,7 +24,7 @@ libraries = [
>  	'gro', 'gso', 'ip_frag', 'jobstats',
>  	'kni', 'latencystats', 'lpm', 'member',
>  	'power', 'pdump', 'rawdev',
> -	'rcu', 'reorder', 'sched', 'security', 'stack', 'vhost',
> +	'reorder', 'sched', 'security', 'stack', 'vhost',
>  	# ipsec lib depends on net, crypto and security
>  	'ipsec',
>  	# add pkt framework libs which use other libs from above
> --
> 2.17.1


  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-02 17:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 137+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-22  6:34 [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/3] RCU integration with LPM library Ruifeng Wang
2019-08-22  6:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 1/3] doc/rcu: add RCU integration design details Ruifeng Wang
2019-08-22  6:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 2/3] lib/ring: add peek API Ruifeng Wang
2019-08-22  6:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 3/3] lib/lpm: integrate RCU QSBR Ruifeng Wang
2019-08-23  1:23   ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-08-26  3:11     ` Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China)
2019-08-26  5:32       ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-08-22 15:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/3] RCU integration with LPM library Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-09-06  9:45 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/6] " Ruifeng Wang
2019-09-06  9:45   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/6] doc/rcu: add RCU integration design details Ruifeng Wang
2019-09-06 19:44     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-09-06  9:45   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/6] lib/ring: add peek API Ruifeng Wang
2019-09-06  9:45   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/6] lib/lpm: integrate RCU QSBR Ruifeng Wang
2019-09-06 19:44     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-09-18 16:15     ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2019-09-19  6:17       ` Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China)
2019-09-06  9:45   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/6] app/test: add test case for LPM RCU integration Ruifeng Wang
2019-09-06 19:45     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-09-06  9:45   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/6] test/lpm: reset total time Ruifeng Wang
2019-09-18 16:17     ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2019-09-19  6:22       ` Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China)
2019-09-06  9:45   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/6] test/lpm: add RCU integration performance tests Ruifeng Wang
2019-09-06 19:46     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-01  6:29   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] Add RCU reclamation APIs Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-01  6:29     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/3] lib/ring: add peek API Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-02 18:42       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-03 19:49         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-07  9:01           ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-09  4:25             ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-10 15:09               ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-11  5:03                 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-11 14:41                   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-11 18:28                     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-13 20:09                       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-14  4:11                         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-01  6:29     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] lib/rcu: add resource reclamation APIs Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-02 17:39       ` Ananyev, Konstantin [this message]
2019-10-03  6:29         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-03 12:26           ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-04  6:07             ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-07 10:46               ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-13  4:35                 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-02 18:50       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-03  6:42         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-03 11:52           ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-04 19:01       ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2019-10-07 13:11       ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2019-10-13  3:02         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-15 16:48           ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2019-10-18  3:47             ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-01  6:29     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/3] doc/rcu: add RCU integration design details Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-03-29 20:57     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] Add RCU reclamation APIs Thomas Monjalon
2020-03-30 17:37       ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-03 18:41     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/4] " Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-03 18:41       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] lib/rcu: add resource " Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-07 17:39         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-04-19 23:22           ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-20  8:19             ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-04-03 18:41       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/4] test/rcu: test cases for RCU defer queue APIs Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-03 18:41       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/4] doc/rcu: add RCU integration design details Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-03 18:41       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/4] lib/rcu: add additional debug logs Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-22  3:30     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/4] Add RCU reclamation APIs Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-22  3:30       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/4] lib/rcu: add resource " Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-22  8:36         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-04-22  8:42           ` David Marchand
2020-04-22  8:51             ` David Marchand
2020-04-22  9:26               ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-04-22  3:30       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/4] test/rcu: test cases for RCU defer queue APIs Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-22  8:27         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-04-22  3:30       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/4] doc/rcu: add RCU integration design details Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-22  3:30       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/4] lib/rcu: add additional debug logs Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-22  8:25         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-04-22 18:46       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/4] Add RCU reclamation APIs David Marchand
2019-10-01 18:28   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] RCU integration with LPM library Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-01 18:28     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/3] lib/lpm: integrate RCU QSBR Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-04 16:05       ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2019-10-09  3:48         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-07  9:21       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-13  4:36         ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-15 11:15           ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-18  3:32             ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-01 18:28     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] app/test: add test case for LPM RCU integration Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-01 18:28     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/3] test/lpm: add RCU integration performance tests Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-10-02 13:02       ` Aaron Conole
2019-10-03  9:09         ` Bruce Richardson
2020-06-08  5:16   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/3] RCU integration with LPM library Ruifeng Wang
2020-06-08  5:16     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/3] lib/lpm: integrate RCU QSBR Ruifeng Wang
2020-06-08 18:46       ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-06-18 17:36         ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-06-18 17:21       ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-06-22  5:46         ` Ruifeng Wang
2020-06-23  4:34           ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-06-08  5:16     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/3] test/lpm: add LPM RCU integration functional tests Ruifeng Wang
2020-06-08  5:16     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/3] test/lpm: add RCU integration performance tests Ruifeng Wang
2020-06-29  8:02   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/3] RCU integration with LPM library Ruifeng Wang
2020-06-29  8:02     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/3] lib/lpm: integrate RCU QSBR Ruifeng Wang
2020-06-29 11:56       ` David Marchand
2020-06-29 12:55         ` Bruce Richardson
2020-06-30 10:35           ` Kinsella, Ray
2020-07-03  7:43         ` David Marchand
2020-07-04 17:00         ` Ruifeng Wang
2020-06-30 10:33       ` Kinsella, Ray
2020-06-29  8:02     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/3] test/lpm: add LPM RCU integration functional tests Ruifeng Wang
2020-06-29  8:03     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/3] test/lpm: add RCU integration performance tests Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-07 14:40   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/3] RCU integration with LPM library Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-07 14:40     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/3] lib/lpm: integrate RCU QSBR Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-07 14:40     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/3] test/lpm: add LPM RCU integration functional tests Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-07 14:40     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 3/3] test/lpm: add RCU integration performance tests Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-07 15:15   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/3] RCU integration with LPM library Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-07 15:15     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/3] lib/lpm: integrate RCU QSBR Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-08 12:36       ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-07-08 14:30       ` David Marchand
2020-07-08 15:34         ` Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-07 15:15     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 2/3] test/lpm: add LPM RCU integration functional tests Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-08 12:37       ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-07-08 14:00         ` Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-07 15:15     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/3] test/lpm: add RCU integration performance tests Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-08 12:37       ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2020-07-08 14:07         ` Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-09  8:02   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 0/3] RCU integration with LPM library Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-09  8:02     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 1/3] lib/lpm: integrate RCU QSBR Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-09 11:49       ` David Marchand
2020-07-09 14:35         ` Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-09  8:02     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/3] test/lpm: add LPM RCU integration functional tests Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-09  8:02     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 3/3] test/lpm: add RCU integration performance tests Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-09 15:42   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 0/3] RCU integration with LPM library Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-09 15:42     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 1/3] lib/lpm: integrate RCU QSBR Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-09 15:42     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 2/3] test/lpm: add LPM RCU integration functional tests Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-09 15:42     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 3/3] test/lpm: add RCU integration performance tests Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-10  2:22   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 0/3] RCU integration with LPM library Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-10  2:22     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 1/3] lib/lpm: integrate RCU QSBR Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-10  2:29       ` Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-10  2:22     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 2/3] test/lpm: add LPM RCU integration functional tests Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-10  2:22     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 3/3] test/lpm: add RCU integration performance tests Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-10  2:29       ` Ruifeng Wang
2020-07-10 12:21     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 0/3] RCU integration with LPM library David Marchand
2020-07-10 14:34       ` Ruifeng Wang

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=2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258019196FF8E@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com \
    --to=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=dharmik.thakkar@arm.com \
    --cc=honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=nd@arm.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=ruifeng.wang@arm.com \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    --cc=vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com \
    --cc=yipeng1.wang@intel.com \
    /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

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git