-----Original Message----- > Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 18:29:31 +0000 > From: Yongseok Koh <ys...@mellanox.com> > To: Andrew Rybchenko <arybche...@solarflare.com>, Thomas Monjalon > <tho...@monjalon.net>, "jianbo....@arm.com" <jianbo....@arm.com>, Jerin > Jacob <jerin.ja...@caviumnetworks.com> > CC: Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarg...@6wind.com>, Nélio Laranjeiro > <nelio.laranje...@6wind.com>, "bruce.richard...@intel.com" > <bruce.richard...@intel.com>, "Ananyev, Konstantin" > <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>, Chao Zhu <chao...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, > "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/8] eal: introduce DMA memory barriers > > > > On Jan 18, 2018, at 11:16 PM, Andrew Rybchenko <arybche...@solarflare.com> > > wrote: > > > > On 01/19/2018 03:44 AM, Yongseok Koh wrote: > >> This commit introduces rte_dma_wmb() and rte_dma_rmb(), in order to > >> guarantee the ordering of coherent shared memory between the CPU and a DMA > >> capable device. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Yongseok Koh > >> <ys...@mellanox.com> > > > > Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko <arybche...@solarflare.com> > > > > It is already really good. Many thanks. > > Thank you! > > > Maybe it would be useful to: > > - avoid duplication of so long explanations (put in in one place and add > > reference?) > > May have to ask Thomas how to do this. Thomas? > > > - explain why it is bound to DMA or call it in a different way, since > > right now it is bound > > to coherent-mapped IO (rte_cio_rmb() ?). Yes, I see benefits to follow > > Linux > > terminology, but may be DPDK can do better :) I just add my concerns, > > but let > > EAL code maintainers to decide > > Good idea. Like to hear from other people. But, following linux terms sometime > could be good to welcome developers from kernel community to DPDK world. :-) > > To people in the cc list, any other concerns? > Especially ARM users - Jianbo and Jerin?
I like Andrew's suggestion. IMO, rte_cio_?mb() makes more sense. > > Thanks, > Yongseok
