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 407EAA00C4; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 16:10:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC15340687; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 16:10:07 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED1BD40140 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 16:10:05 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1648221005; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=aKjCf2eKgaXdnhLlWeYSLDEfP3o+E1eCmAMBGRe1u/Y=; b=RcpRcxyI81dCeRAZak7OOPM19WSSHSyLvWsl/TEPM8ZMY1b3I2LrOMS7WMMGSpjyMwF/8t vnt/H+2Kanpqz1gvNr8et/pOVLKdZHp6Ovbz0PKjEnCwOqiZOt8qGtdJSeUXamLOWC+ky6 QSh+/1UdcY11IoRSIQ0o5eut6k8QBxk= Received: from mail-lj1-f200.google.com (mail-lj1-f200.google.com [209.85.208.200]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-663-F3fNH0m4NLmI14jUbVOmDg-1; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 11:10:03 -0400 X-MC-Unique: F3fNH0m4NLmI14jUbVOmDg-1 Received: by mail-lj1-f200.google.com with SMTP id h4-20020a2ea484000000b002480c04898aso3097886lji.6 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 08:10:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=aKjCf2eKgaXdnhLlWeYSLDEfP3o+E1eCmAMBGRe1u/Y=; b=23ijtJxLlzIoyIdrmd7JlYdwY+jNOTSyPp+Mcmo2QQ3gsN9cINXG4PMUaD++Vdni+6 tqynmOyun8sEjAITz8IOOlVeYdR3SGBdDSZR7p5evPEGxkliZVjjBT0PJvpw7nIMy8xV ztMRaC1nHmBJXaZOHJllnOtDHsLC1EAo2+U14ej0ih+OFvWwolNEBzpT5UTaku04p1EH kVd9gzmx3tTFPuYh9/soVDi9w4BEiXyDVt2Kcahg8LncU9c9mrRiQ/guIbuKljbfvjXo PL1LrCaiIUIU7nsnsMl2M9VrXHE1WPHgB3eT31hLRo0Szn2fhNizIB7dmjon8nwPpj1M YDaA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532+WRPbbJGE7XNfeaTfezQRl1FV3KV8khgiBiD+WjbhApvJ1P4W ANcCh20NSTj2uTgkLiibq1fMS8JsHAnqWOrlz0tf02lcrmHSgzUE53b5qUKubXgMBj4kxewiD8+ YPHK/aB/v2DeV/z325CA= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:398a:b0:44a:56b9:c03e with SMTP id j10-20020a056512398a00b0044a56b9c03emr8116077lfu.553.1648221001925; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 08:10:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwUz7QPkXluD5r2KrZ6VnIkMgXqi/42c0yqRQgf/kO3dDC6wkwe3femd/+5m/4Rr8zgVnE8U7q6vRnKiT1o+FI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:398a:b0:44a:56b9:c03e with SMTP id j10-20020a056512398a00b0044a56b9c03emr8116059lfu.553.1648221001702; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 08:10:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220323093001.20618-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> <20220325121126.GA6378@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> <2027001.KlZ2vcFHjT@thomas> In-Reply-To: <2027001.KlZ2vcFHjT@thomas> From: David Marchand Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 16:09:50 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] eal: factorize lcore main loop To: Thomas Monjalon , Tyler Retzlaff Cc: dev , Bruce Richardson , Dmitry Kozlyuk , Narcisa Ana Maria Vasile , Dmitry Malloy , Pallavi Kadam Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 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, Mar 25, 2022 at 3:58 PM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > But seeing how this code has been there from day 1, I would not > > > request a backport. > > > > this looks better to me it ends up being a bit less code and it solves > > the problem in a general fashion for platforms including windows. > > > > on windows the implementation does run the start_routine before assigning > > thread which was addressed with this patch. (still not merged) > > http://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=22094 > > > > it's likely your patch will be merged before mine so when that happens > > i'll just quietly abandon mine. however if some desire exists for a > > backport the simpler patch i provided could be used. > > Your patch could be merged now that we start a new cycle. > What do you prefer? Is David's solution better? > In this case, should we reject your patch? We can merge Tyler fix right away because it is a real issue on Windows and it can be backported. My series can be rebased and merged later as a cleanup/unified solution for all OS. -- David Marchand