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 B857E42490; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 13:18:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5121842D3D; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 13:18:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19DBC40A79 for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 13:18:55 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1674735535; 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=6Kf5I0iN2wk5g7Br8OhvCPMIyUyiv5E1pGk76VrUVEk=; b=JQzGABmluXcgRqXZE05g3RmTq13fL/tA+QzJgr/ijSD84qhx/ADKy9WVNTh6ZBmP3BEBk6 9nm447gUSmR6xmKTiSrSjceNNRMfOfi5R1VHrQBFqKEFz7EMM/LDIfthTUPnOoK4y/6miH U57FPc9zWsrdlekAqQOEq5wiCzsL6W8= Received: from mail-ej1-f72.google.com (mail-ej1-f72.google.com [209.85.218.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id us-mta-600-Mc6pwLawPBGW21glG_yUvA-1; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 07:18:54 -0500 X-MC-Unique: Mc6pwLawPBGW21glG_yUvA-1 Received: by mail-ej1-f72.google.com with SMTP id wz4-20020a170906fe4400b0084c7e7eb6d0so1138686ejb.19 for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 04:18:54 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=6Kf5I0iN2wk5g7Br8OhvCPMIyUyiv5E1pGk76VrUVEk=; b=H0ymh8hXohbh0cjuU/DR8ANucUmXNSu8olXcFygnNnLWn2YAnTjIxbzH80VmpKSC7T uMVa1WaVcvI3PgCtbBGfEs3hnGxWjyNiEqPpbucWySNE+WazyPV+KkZ8Whw97jXkcBwJ F4IVPE/nafwaAIkTSl9+bRSUqrHUv7yRHnOdvrCh8V06zjFkWinYzUdcMfA0VbJd/XdM bYqlZGoLSlPi2H44eJyHnuloqsBMO5yWYkJKVlMLd+tnYzklH/RkxCtQfOUHchFMRqJ7 jW88vagQHSid88Cg9cWxkPtQcmN2lDKLCdlV3JRX7q4kAMBlIO3RNr7S+e8aP85Hhhzz tbcg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2krkRc/2cYBnp4MaJpHsH+B3/EaYy4SAvKXuULHBojYwbD5f41G2 PODrui/O7jSb8PQNS4rvvEj7U8f1jRbO1/ZWEqvvE3X3A5d+VzNPhlzwzZXLjfmp0eKNmjCDXqt leuq0cqMlRuc7sqINYyU= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:c206:b0:78d:b819:e0e7 with SMTP id d6-20020a170906c20600b0078db819e0e7mr4206032ejz.83.1674735533155; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 04:18:53 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXv9o5Hh79ZQn0OrqRWvmmQHTF0b4aZYeb3ICVXL/JhPZkxUi27qeeRjxoKuLIh6gETvz75xUWDJ2mBHCGdC7yE= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:c206:b0:78d:b819:e0e7 with SMTP id d6-20020a170906c20600b0078db819e0e7mr4206021ejz.83.1674735532944; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 04:18:52 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220328121758.26632-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> <20230119184620.3195267-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> <20230119184620.3195267-2-david.marchand@redhat.com> <20230119114202.27f7da80@hermes.local> <20230119203923.GA32536@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> <20230119215053.GB32536@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> In-Reply-To: <20230119215053.GB32536@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> From: David Marchand Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2023 13:18:40 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/9] eal: annotate spinlock, rwlock and seqlock To: Tyler Retzlaff Cc: Stephen Hemminger , dev@dpdk.org, maxime.coquelin@redhat.com, chenbo.xia@intel.com, jiayu.hu@intel.com, yuanx.wang@intel.com, xuan.ding@intel.com, Anatoly Burakov , =?UTF-8?Q?Mattias_R=C3=B6nnblom?= , David Christensen , Bruce Richardson , Konstantin Ananyev 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 Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 10:50 PM Tyler Retzlaff wrote: > > > we briefly touched on abstracting annotations in another thread. it > > > would be favorable if annotations were stashed behind macros that could > > > be expanded for more than just clang/internal/under doxygen to make > > > available opportunities to use other annotation dialects that may be > > > compatible. > > > > I am open to abstractions. > > Do you have pointers for an equivalent functionnality in other > > compilers/tooling? > > aye, reference documentation for SALv2 is here. > https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/code-quality/using-sal-annotations-to-reduce-c-cpp-code-defects?view=msvc-170 > > locking annotations are here. > https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/code-quality/annotating-locking-behavior?view=msvc-170 I had a brief look at it and it seems close to what clang proposes. I think there would be no issue with my current proposal since SAL uses function attributes-like syntax for locking. Do you see anything blocking? Thanks Tyler. -- David Marchand