On Mon, 23 Dec 2019 05:04:12 +0000
Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com> wrote:
> <snip>
>
> >
> > On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 16:07:23 +0000
> > Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Converting these into macros will help remove the size based duplication
> > > of
> > APIs. I came up with the following macro:
> > >
> > > #define RTE_GET_BIT(nr, var, ret, memorder) \ ({ \
> > > if (sizeof(var) == sizeof(uint32_t)) { \
> > > uint32_t mask1 = 1U << (nr)%32; \
> > > ret = __atomic_load_n(&var, (memorder)) & mask1;\
> > > } \
> > > else {\
> > > uint64_t mask2 = 1UL << (nr)%64;\
> > > ret = __atomic_load_n(&var, (memorder)) & mask2;\
> > > } \
> > > })
> >
> > Macros are more error prone. Especially because this is in exposed header
> > file
> That's another question I have. Why do we need to have these APIs in a public
> header file? These will add to the ABI burden as well. These APIs should be
> in a common-but-not-public header file. I am also not sure how helpful these
> APIs are for applications as these APIs seem to have considered requirements
> only from the PMDs.
Why do we have to wrap every C atomic builtin? What value is there in that?
