>-----Original Message-----
>From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net]
>Sent: Monday, November 25, 2019 1:55 PM
>To: Wang, Yipeng1 <yipeng1.w...@intel.com>; Dharmik Thakkar
><dharmik.thak...@arm.com>
>Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Gobriel, Sameh <sameh.gobr...@intel.com>; Richardson, Bruce
><bruce.richard...@intel.com>;
>honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com
>Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] lib/hash: remove unnecessary locks in lock-free
>
>25/11/2019 19:49, Wang, Yipeng1:
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Dharmik Thakkar [mailto:dharmik.thak...@arm.com]
>> >Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 10:18 AM
>> >To: Wang, Yipeng1 <yipeng1.w...@intel.com>; Gobriel, Sameh
>> ><sameh.gobr...@intel.com>; Richardson, Bruce
>> ><bruce.richard...@intel.com>
>> >Cc: dev@dpdk.org; honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com; Dharmik Thakkar
>> ><dharmik.thak...@arm.com>
>> >Subject: [PATCH] lib/hash: remove unnecessary locks in lock-free
>> >
>> >Remove __hash_rw_reader_unlock() calls from lock free hash lookup
>> >
>> >Signed-off-by: Dharmik Thakkar <dharmik.thak...@arm.com>
>> >Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu <gavin...@arm.com>
>> >Reviewed-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>
>> >---
>> Acked-by: Yipeng Wang <yipeng1.w...@intel.com>
>>
>> Thanks for the patch!
>
>Excuse me, there is no motivation (the why) in this patch.
>Is it critical? which gain?
>
[Wang, Yipeng]
Thomas, do you mean the commit message is not clear enough?
I think it is self-explained that in the "lock-free" implementation, we don't
need
"read_unlock()" and the subject line also says that.
But it is always better to be more explicit.
