RE: [PATCH v1 1/2] deque: add multi-thread unsafe double ended queue

["Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>]

> From: Aditya Ambadipudi [mailto:aditya.ambadipudi@arm.com]
> Sent: Monday, 1 April 2024 03.37
> 
> From: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
> 
> Add a multi-thread unsafe double ended queue data structure. This
> library provides a simple and efficient alternative to multi-thread
> safe ring when multi-thread safety is not required.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Aditya Ambadipudi <aditya.ambadipudi@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
> ---

This is a good contribution, thank you.

Two high-level comments:

1.
Please use head/tail explicitly in function names, not implicitly.
E.g. rename rte_deque_enqueue_bulk_elem() to rte_deque_enqueue_at_head_bulk_elem(), like rte_deque_enqueue_at_tail_bulk_elem().
Also consider removing "at" from the function names, e.g. rte_deque_(head|tail)_enqueue_bulk_elem() instead of rte_deque_enqueue_at_(head|tail)_bulk_elem().

2.
In the future, someone might come up with a lock-free implementation, like for the stack.
Please ensure that the API and documentation is prepared for that, so we don't have to use a different namespace for such a lock-free implementation.
I haven't reviewed the patch thoroughly; if it is already be prepared for this, you can ignore this comment.