On 2022-05-15 17:19, Morten Brørup wrote:
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.
My guess would be that the lib/eal/include/generic directory is where
the generic implementations of APIs for which there also exist
machine-specific implementations go. The seqlock is not an example of such.
