olsheim
From: lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org<mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org>
[mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of Bill Fischofer
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 3:31 AM
To: lng-odp-forward
Subject: [lng-odp] [ARCH DESIGN] Queues and Synchronization/Scheduling models
ilad
From: lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org
[mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of Bill Fischofer
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 8:10 PM
To: Ola Liljedahl
Cc: lng-odp-forward
Subject: Re: [lng-odp] [ARCH DESIGN] Queues and Synchronization/Scheduling
models
Ok, thanks for the clarifi
Some comments inline.
Alex
On 20 October 2014 22:54, Bill Fischofer wrote:
> See inline comments.
>
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Ola Liljedahl
> wrote:
>
>> On 20 October 2014 19:09, Bill Fischofer
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, thanks for the clarification.
>>>
>>> I agree it makes sense for ato
See inline comments.
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Ola Liljedahl
wrote:
> On 20 October 2014 19:09, Bill Fischofer
> wrote:
>
>> Ok, thanks for the clarification.
>>
>> I agree it makes sense for atomic queues to be implicitly released by
>> subsequent queueing operations on buffers taken fr
On 20 October 2014 19:09, Bill Fischofer wrote:
> Ok, thanks for the clarification.
>
> I agree it makes sense for atomic queues to be implicitly released by
> subsequent queueing operations on buffers taken from them. But that sort
> of reinforces the notion that one of the pieces of buffer met
Ok, thanks for the clarification.
I agree it makes sense for atomic queues to be implicitly released by
subsequent queueing operations on buffers taken from them. But that sort
of reinforces the notion that one of the pieces of buffer meta data needed
is the last_queue that the buffer was on so t
Bill, some spelling errors... I was listing the current calls that release
the scheduling lock for a queue.
* odp_queue_end() was supposed to be odp_queue_enq() (q is a d upside
down, maybe I am getting dyslectic?)
* odp_queue_end_multi() was of course odp_queue_enq_multi(). Not sure how
this ca
Thanks, Ola. I need to think about this and respond more carefully, but in
the meantime could you propose the syntax/semantics of odp_queue_end(),
odp_queue_end_multi(), and odp_schedule_release() in a bit more detail?
These seem to be new APIs and we need to be clear about their proposed
semant
On 17 October 2014 10:01, Alexandru Badicioiu <
alexandru.badici...@linaro.org> wrote:
> Hi Bill, check my thoughts inline.
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
> On 17 October 2014 03:31, Bill Fischofer
> wrote:
>
>> Based on discussions we had yesterday and today, I'd like to outline the
>> open issues regarding
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Alexandru Badicioiu
wrote:
> Hi Bill, check my thoughts inline.
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
> On 17 October 2014 03:31, Bill Fischofer wrote:
>>
>> Based on discussions we had yesterday and today, I'd like to outline the
>> open issues regarding queues and synchronization
Hi Bill, check my thoughts inline.
Thanks,
Alex
On 17 October 2014 03:31, Bill Fischofer wrote:
> Based on discussions we had yesterday and today, I'd like to outline the
> open issues regarding queues and synchronization/scheduling models. We'd
> like to get consensus on this in time for next
Based on discussions we had yesterday and today, I'd like to outline the
open issues regarding queues and synchronization/scheduling models. We'd
like to get consensus on this in time for next week's Tuesday call.
ODP identifies three different synchronization/scheduling models for
queues: Parall
12 matches
Mail list logo
