(Resent with Konstantin's new email address.) > From: Mattias Rönnblom [mailto:mattias.ronnb...@ericsson.com] > Sent: Sunday, 15 May 2022 14.40 > > Two questions remain: > > 1) Should the seqlock and the seqcount reside in different header > files? > 2) Is it it good enough to provided only a spinlock-protected seqlock? > > Question 1 I don't really have an opinion on. Both ways seems perfectly > reasonable to me. I noted Morten wanted a split, and left to my own > devices this is probably what I would do as well.
Argument for separate header files: If we add e.g. a rte_seqticketlock_t later, it should be able to include the rte_seqcount_t header file without also getting the contextually irrelevant rte_seqlock_t type and functions. I don't feel strongly about this. > > I think the answer to 2 is yes. We can provide other variants in the > future, would the need arise. Agree. > > <snip> Please move the header files from /lib/eal/include to /lib/eal/include/generic, where the other lock header files reside.
