From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <arnon@qwilt.com> Received: from mail-io0-f176.google.com (mail-io0-f176.google.com [209.85.223.176]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B753CF80 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 15:31:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-io0-f176.google.com with SMTP id d11-v6so2694963iof.11 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 06:31:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=qwilt-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=NxkGydFtdWK4uT5CxSLhcOPr6lBsl/sNigo51yUnMoY=; b=wsSQb7BFEgHSTv3/+roAC2EWzHU8GiX9av4CLwziRPu8xpQpwLl9JGDBVvUSEMifWC 1LabcIC86lLzAvaCe8c/bH78EKASJ7XWi/DW+QhyB1YcAWzAeq6g6YG9uXQ7pmxkU43g obzt2cVHaP+DTX8WxTYa8WAlxBGwKd83P5y9d4/3xMoTnJesbA6X9DFBnnH3V4gTx+QS Cld/278yW8DTpXZbXKsj8uZyNHl5wjqvlR7tuqkL4x2wz3T+mPPKFKepX4v+kw/rNegu P9+lJkua6JhqUPp5nOtlMRXXFjO6hgBDZfbJaWZKS6akxVvDa7rWsN/13PNiM9zP/5vc 64ZQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=NxkGydFtdWK4uT5CxSLhcOPr6lBsl/sNigo51yUnMoY=; b=cam7m7wzyRwfhBd2CY5xajpmu+zhCzsl304uG877jwV+8SPmpoSqCYH3zYM05dj9JA /COK8MLrURT5cZBbxWGmUqZfno8lh1iodLhVNlSVl/pxjeVTK+4NR3yLBNJyMAqFMovd UhAcwttXrvy0FbsWJOPRPEJ+ofagEFATWX+KN2dLNYr21Rjz7RVzOoRKsvls+9gG+dbZ 5bOx5o3WITDrjRe6ByyehdpcAi2h2amM5joI+Nd9H9uQ4x17BLNz2myWfx1u6vUvuGy8 qO7Mk3N83ikGZbdfAITyKgz2w53OWg96XvLUtSN5H8QVdAVIH5FlwjOh1Pxy0oC0lgb3 Cs4Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tBghFPRQuCAKEK4wbmHRLB5XPFvka+tMDe4nzJ5i7NDGHLdb3iE lJ0Ra40yHapY6/3ffs75h8J7OZPPazNGdAoKVpBnNw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4/DI6aQQKBpuK2RK5DpiLeFYxRp30JFbGa6PdpUm2izN8HCViB6KzgFdVnKJhdxkT38Yvyji6x8znFDr2YQnz0= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:6918:: with SMTP id e24-v6mr11601345ioc.242.1524231087759; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 06:31:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.142.145 with HTTP; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 06:31:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <93afdd1b-b108-9986-5fbe-7d3aacc92ca3@intel.com> References: <1524117669-25729-1-git-send-email-arnon@qwilt.com> <1524117669-25729-11-git-send-email-arnon@qwilt.com> <d162912b-d8b8-8f6e-ab92-27d205f51baa@intel.com> <CAKy9EB3Zzp0wogQpESYC3xnzcSf7PNpyR-Fvr9vSACeAs0DTtA@mail.gmail.com> <93afdd1b-b108-9986-5fbe-7d3aacc92ca3@intel.com> From: Arnon Warshavsky <arnon@qwilt.com> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 16:31:27 +0300 Message-ID: <CAKy9EB2+vvovcUfNQDVX66bLu7g-kqKCQ4NtxHkPG4+F63EfUg@mail.gmail.com> To: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com> Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, "Lu, Wenzhuo" <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>, "Doherty, Declan" <declan.doherty@intel.com>, jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, "Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 10/11] eal: replace rte_panic instances in init sequence X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 13:31:28 -0000 On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 5:57 PM, Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.burakov@intel.com > wrote: > On 19-Apr-18 3:48 PM, Arnon Warshavsky wrote: > >> Copy on the commit message and volatile. >> >> Regarding the new function defunct_and_remain_in_endless_loop () >> I don't think I can put that in a separate patch without breaking the >> current patch independence. >> > > How so? > > Just leave some panic instances in there for thread-related stuff and fix > them up in the next patch. > > Also, i'm not sure sending threads into an infinite loop on panic is such > a good idea. You might want to look at Olivier's approach [1] to creating > threads, using pthread_barriers and pthread_kill/cancel. > > This does warrant a separate patch now :) Thanks Anatoly Going into the infinite loop looked like the lesser evil at the time , but I guess I was too eager to get rid of as many panics on this path as I could. Given the bw I will need to properly handle it, and the fact that there are still some more panic calls in the code I will withdraw this specific removal inside the thread and handle it for the next build.