On 29-May-19 9:11 PM, David Marchand wrote:
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 6:31 PM Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.bura...@intel.com>
wrote:
This patchset removes the shared memory config from public
API, and replaces all usages of said config with new API
calls.
The patchset is mostly a search-and-replace job and should
be pretty easy to review. However, the changes to ENA
I went and did the same job with some scripts.
Not sure you really need to split in all those patches.
We are not going to backport this.
The "separate commits" thing is made for the benefit of reviewers, not
backporters. In my experience it's much easier to get a maintainer to
review a smaller patch than it is to look through a wall of irrelevant
changes.
That said, for trivial changes such as these, maybe this is indeed
unnecessary.
Some changes are mixed, the kni changes are in the hash: patch.
Oops, will fix, thanks for pointing it out!
I spotted a missed qlock in :
lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_tailqs.c:
rte_rwlock_read_lock(&mcfg->qlock);
lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_tailqs.c:
rte_rwlock_read_unlock(&mcfg->qlock);
On the names of the functions, could we have something shorter ?
The prefix rte_eal_mcfg_ is not necessary from my pov.
I can drop the mcfg, but IMO all of these locking functions should be
kept under one namespace, and rte_eal_ is too broad.
driver are of particular interest, because they're using
the shared memory config in a way that i find confusing.
I thought the same when I looked at it before.
Hopefully the ena maintainers will enlight us :-).
I tried to implement the equivalent changes as well as
i could, but since the code doesn't make any sense to me,
i would really like to request help from ENA maintainers.
Everything else should be pretty straightforward.
We are missing the deprecation notice removal at the end of the series and
a note in the release notes.
Will add. Making into V1 deadline was higher priority :D
Thanks Anatoly!
--
Thanks,
Anatoly
