From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (mail.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.3]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 661071B5C8 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 22:03:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6F184003F for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 22:03:39 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix, from userid 1004) id B38294003E; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 22:03:39 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on bernadotte.lysator.liu.se X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.4.1 X-Spam-Score: -1.0 Received: from [192.168.1.59] (host-90-232-161-71.mobileonline.telia.com [90.232.161.71]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 687D44003A; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 22:03:36 +0100 (CET) To: Honnappa Nagarahalli , "Van Haaren, Harry" , Stephen Hemminger Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , nd , Dharmik Thakkar , Malvika Gupta , "Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)" References: <20181122033055.3431-1-honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com> <20181127142803.423c9b00@xeon-e3> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Mattias_R=c3=b6nnblom?= Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 22:03:37 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/3] tqs: add thread quiescent state library X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 21:03:40 -0000 On 2018-11-30 03:25, Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote: >> Generally I'm in favour of using established libraries (particularly for complex >> functionality like RCU) but in this case I think there's a tradeoff with raw >> performance. > The licensing info [1] is very interesting. Again I am no lawyer :) > > [1] https://github.com/urcu/userspace-rcu/blob/master/include/urcu/static/urcu-qsbr.h#L184 > If you don't know the macro/inline function exception of LGPL 2.1, maybe it's time to read the license text. Lawyer or not.