14/10/2024 17:19, Stephen Hemminger:
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 08:51:09 +0200
> Mattias Rönnblom wrote:
>
> > On 2024-10-11 10:04, Mattias Rönnblom wrote:
> > > On 2024-10-10 23:24, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > >>> + *
> > >>> + * An lcore variable is not tied to the owning thread's li
On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 08:51:09 +0200
Mattias Rönnblom wrote:
> On 2024-10-11 10:04, Mattias Rönnblom wrote:
> > On 2024-10-10 23:24, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>
>
>
> >>> + *
> >>> + * An lcore variable is not tied to the owning thread's lifetime. It's
> >>> + * available for use by any thread im
On 2024-10-11 10:04, Mattias Rönnblom wrote:
On 2024-10-10 23:24, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
+ *
+ * An lcore variable is not tied to the owning thread's lifetime. It's
+ * available for use by any thread immediately after having been
+ * allocated, and continues to be available throughout the l
11/10/2024 10:04, Mattias Rönnblom:
> On 2024-10-10 23:24, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This new feature looks to bring something interesting to DPDK.
> > There was a good amount of discussion and review,
> > and there is a real effort of documentation.
> >
> > However, some choices
> >> +/**
> >> + * Get pointer to lcore variable instance of the current thread.
> >> + *
> >> + * May only be used by EAL threads and registered non-EAL threads.
> >> + */
> >> +#define RTE_LCORE_VAR_VALUE(handle) \
> >
> > RTE_LCORE_VAR_LOCAL?
> >
>
> Why is that better?
>
> Maybe Morten can re
11/10/2024 10:09, Morten Brørup:
> > > +static void *
> > > +lcore_var_alloc(size_t size, size_t align)
> > > +{
> > > + void *handle;
> > > + unsigned int lcore_id;
> > > + void *value;
> > > +
> > > + offset = RTE_ALIGN_CEIL(offset, align);
> > > +
> > > + if (offset + size > RTE_MAX_LCORE_VAR) {
Mattias,
Please note that most of Thomas' questions are in the interest of the general
public, considered requests for further documentation.
> Do you have benchmarks results of the modules using such variables
> (power, random, service)?
> It would be interesting to compare time efficiency and
On 2024-10-10 23:24, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
Hello,
This new feature looks to bring something interesting to DPDK.
There was a good amount of discussion and review,
and there is a real effort of documentation.
However, some choices done in this implementation
were not explained or advertised eno
Hello,
This new feature looks to bring something interesting to DPDK.
There was a good amount of discussion and review,
and there is a real effort of documentation.
However, some choices done in this implementation
were not explained or advertised enough in the documentation,
in my opinion.
I th
On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 18:17:56 +0200
Mattias Rönnblom wrote:
> On 2024-10-10 17:54, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 16:21:59 +0200
> > Mattias Rönnblom wrote:
> >
> >> Introduce DPDK per-lcore id variables, or lcore variables for short.
> >>
> >> An lcore variable has one value
On 2024-10-10 17:54, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 16:21:59 +0200
Mattias Rönnblom wrote:
Introduce DPDK per-lcore id variables, or lcore variables for short.
An lcore variable has one value for every current and future lcore
id-equipped thread.
The primary use case is for st
On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 16:21:59 +0200
Mattias Rönnblom wrote:
> Introduce DPDK per-lcore id variables, or lcore variables for short.
>
> An lcore variable has one value for every current and future lcore
> id-equipped thread.
>
> The primary use case is for statically allocating
> small, frequent
12 matches
Mail list logo
