> 20/10/2020 16:17, David Hunt: > > On 20/10/2020 3:01 PM, David Hunt wrote: > > > On 20/10/2020 8:35 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > >> 20/10/2020 04:49, Ruifeng Wang: > > >>> From: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > > >>>> 15/10/2020 14:04, Anatoly Burakov: > > >>>>> +/** > > >>>>> + * This function is not supported on ARM. > > >>>>> + */ > > >>>>> +static inline void > > >>>>> +rte_power_monitor(const volatile void *p, const uint64_t > > >>>> expected_value, > > >>>>> + const uint64_t value_mask, const uint64_t > > >>>>> tsc_timestamp, > > >>>>> + const uint8_t data_sz) { > > >>>>> + RTE_SET_USED(p); > > >>>>> + RTE_SET_USED(expected_value); > > >>>>> + RTE_SET_USED(value_mask); > > >>>>> + RTE_SET_USED(tsc_timestamp); > > >>>>> + RTE_SET_USED(data_sz); > > >>>>> +} > > >>>> Are you sure it cannot be partially supported with WFE instruction? > > >>>> > > >>> Armv8 WFE instruction can support monitoring of specific address for > > >>> changes, > > >>> but not monitoring of TSC timestamp. > > >> So it is a partial support. > > >> > > >> We must try hard to unify architectures support > > >> to avoid #ifdef everywhere. > > >> > > >> I don't agree with how are managed new instructions recently. > > >> Please look further. > > >> > > > > > > Hi Thomas, > > > > > > We believe this is ready for -rc1, can we discuss this with the > > > technical board before the RC1 tag is applied? > > > > > > > Hi Thomas, > > By way of further follow-up, here are the reasons why we believe > > it's ready for merge. > > > > There are 18 Acks for the 10 patches, with the two critical patches > > getting 4 acks each. > > These acks are from ARM, Marvell, IBM and Intel. > > There have been 7 revisions, with quite a lot of discussion, and all > > comments have been addressed and Ack'd. > > From what I can see, the community are in agreement that this patch > > should be merged. > > The problem is that I don't agree,
Thomas, could you explain about what exactly you don't agree with? Is it about WFE? Something else? Konstantin > and I feel you tried to avoid comments from others at the beginning. > > Now I don't want to spend more time on it before tagging -rc1. > > Next time, you'll make sure to Cc and reply everybody. >