On Thursday, November 5, 2020 9:55 AM, Jiawen Wu wrote: > On Thursday, November 5, 2020 1:24 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > On 11/3/2020 11:08 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > 27/10/2020 12:37, Ferruh Yigit: > > >> On 10/27/2020 2:39 AM, Jiawen Wu wrote: > > >>> On Monday, October 26, 2020 10:56 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > >>>> Series applied to dpdk-next-net/main, thanks. > > >>>> > > >>>> 57/58 & 58/58 has been distributed to the relevant commits while > > >>>> merging, please double check them in the upstream repo. > > >>>> > > >>>> 56/58 & 53/58 has been dropped while merging. > > >>>> 56/58 needs a new version which can be send individually, > > >>>> 53/58 is adding a deprecated feature, it can't go in as it is. > > >>>> > > >>>> Also can you please send a patch for the comment mentioned in 38/58? > > >>> > > >>> I will send two additional patches, one as a new version for > > >>> 56/58, the > > other one to fix 'rte_panic()'. > > > > > > When pulling in the main branch, I see some checkpatches warnings > > > (in order of criticality): > > > Using rte_smp_[r/w]mb > > > Using rte_panic/rte_exit > > > Using compiler attribute directly > > > > > > Please could you fix them (at least first two) before the second series? > > > > > > > Hi Jiawen, Jian, > > > > I would like to double check if above request is clear, and if it is OK in > > your > end? > > > > Thanks, > > ferruh > > Sorry I did not see this message, I will add a patch to fix this problem > today.
I saw ' rte_smp_*mb ' is in the deprecation notices, but there is no function can be an alternative. I would like to use 'rte_atomic_thread_fence(__ATOMIC_ACQUIRE)' to replace 'rte_smp_rmb()', is it the correct usage?
