On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 3:46 PM McDaniel, Timothy <timothy.mcdan...@intel.com> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > > Sent: Friday, October 30, 2020 5:02 AM > > To: McDaniel, Timothy <timothy.mcdan...@intel.com> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Carrillo, Erik G <erik.g.carri...@intel.com>; Eads, Gage > > <gage.e...@intel.com>; Van Haaren, Harry <harry.van.haa...@intel.com>; > > jer...@marvell.com; david.march...@redhat.com > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/23] Add DLB2 PMD > > > > 30/10/2020 10:43, Timothy McDaniel: > > > - note that the code still uses its private byte-encoded versions of > > > umonitor/umwait, rather than the new functions in the power > > > patch that are built on top of those intrinsics. This is intentional. > > > > Why? Now these intrinsics are available in the main branch. > > We should avoid duplicating such code. > > > > > > I had asked that the low level intrinsics (UMWAIT/UMONITOR) be split out so > that DLB/DLB2 could use them instead of its own private byte-encoded > versions, but instead we have these wrappers that call the low level > intrinsics. Those wrappers > introduce additional overhead that is not required for DLB/DLB2. I have a > meeting with Ma Liang on Monday to discuss.
Then why we merged the EAL patches? The all-purpose was to use this by other subsystems. If it is only for the power library then we should make specific to the power library. Thomas, Should I take this series in eventdev or I need to wait to sort out this?
