Hi Olivier,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Olivier Matz <olivier.m...@6wind.com>
> Sent: Friday, July 12, 2019 7:49 PM
> To: Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) <gavin...@arm.com>
> Cc: tho...@monjalon.net; dev@dpdk.org; nd <n...@arm.com>;
> jer...@marvell.com; hemant.agra...@nxp.com; nipun.gu...@nxp.com;
> Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>;
> i.maxim...@samsung.com; sta...@dpdk.org; Ruifeng Wang (Arm
> Technology China) <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/2] ring: add reset API to flush the ring
> when not in use
>
> Hi Gavin,
>
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 11:06:28AM +0000, Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)
> wrote:
> > Hi Olivier,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Olivier Matz <olivier.m...@6wind.com>
> > > Sent: Friday, July 12, 2019 5:54 PM
> > > To: Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) <gavin...@arm.com>
> > > Cc: tho...@monjalon.net; dev@dpdk.org; nd <n...@arm.com>;
> > > jer...@marvell.com; hemant.agra...@nxp.com; nipun.gu...@nxp.com;
> > > Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>;
> > > i.maxim...@samsung.com; sta...@dpdk.org
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/2] ring: add reset API to flush the
> ring
> > > when not in use
> > >
> > > Hi Gavin,
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 09:32:39AM +0000, Gavin Hu (Arm Technology
> China)
> > > wrote:
> > > > Hi Olivier and Thomas,
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 4, 2019 10:42 PM
> > > > > To: Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China) <gavin...@arm.com>
> > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Olivier Matz <olivier.m...@6wind.com>; nd
> > > > > <n...@arm.com>; jer...@marvell.com; hemant.agra...@nxp.com;
> > > > > nipun.gu...@nxp.com; Honnappa Nagarahalli
> > > > > <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>; i.maxim...@samsung.com;
> > > > > sta...@dpdk.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/2] ring: add reset API to flush
> the ring
> > > > > when not in use
> > > > >
> > > > > 29/03/2019 15:17, Olivier Matz:
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 11:31:25AM +0800, Gavin Hu wrote:
> > > > > > > Currently, the flush is done by dequeuing the ring in a while
> > > > > > > loop.
> It is
> > > > > > > much simpler to flush the queue by resetting the head and tail
> indices.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release")
> > > > > > > Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Gavin Hu <gavin...@arm.com>
> > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>
> > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli
> <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > --- a/lib/librte_ring/rte_ring_version.map
> > > > > > > +++ b/lib/librte_ring/rte_ring_version.map
> > > > > > > @@ -17,3 +17,10 @@ DPDK_2.2 {
> > > > > > > rte_ring_free;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > } DPDK_2.0;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +EXPERIMENTAL {
> > > > > > > + global:
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + rte_ring_reset;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +};
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To me, a static inline function does not need to be added in
> > > > > > rte_ring_version.map (or is it due to a check script checking the
> > > > > > __rte_experimental tag ?). I found at least one commit where it
> > > > > > is not the case:
> > > > > > c277b34c1b3b ("mbuf: add function returning buffer address")
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are 2 options:
> > > > > > 1- remove the rte_ring_version.map part of the patch.
> > > > > > 2- change the static inline function into a standard function.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would prefer 2-, because it allows to keep an api/abi compat
> > > > > > layer in the future.
> > > > >
> > > > > There are no news about this patch.
> > > > > I classify it as changes requested.
> > > > >
> > > > Sorry for missed your comments for long time, I just submitted v8.
> > > > I took the first option as it is in the data path and to keep
> > > > consistent to
> its
> > > neighboring functions.
> > >
> > > Could you give a little more context about why you need to reset
> > > the ring in the data path? I see that it is used in rte_hash_reset(),
> > > but in my thinking, this was more used at init/exit.
> > Sorry，literally it is in the control path, but I was impressed it will
> > impact
> the
> > Data path performance when discussing this patch with Honnappa.
>
> I'm asking this because given the recent discussions about ABI stability,
> I'd like to avoid defining a new static inline if it is not required.
Ok, will take 2nd option in V9, and squash the two patches into one, otherwise
it reports the following error:
"error: ‘rte_ring_reset’ defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]"
Best regards,
Gavin
