On Sat, Jun 11, 2022 at 01:25:56PM +0100, Konstantin Ananyev wrote:
>
> >>>Add rte_thread_equal() that tests if two rte_thread_id are equal.
> >>>
> >>>Signed-off-by: Narcisa Vasile <navas...@microsoft.com>
> >>>Signed-off-by: Tyler Retzlaff <roret...@linux.microsoft.com>
> >>>---
> >>> lib/eal/common/rte_thread.c | 6 ++++++
> >>> lib/eal/include/rte_thread.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> >>> lib/eal/version.map | 1 +
> >>> 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>>diff --git a/lib/eal/common/rte_thread.c b/lib/eal/common/rte_thread.c
> >>>index 10d6652..21ed042 100644
> >>>--- a/lib/eal/common/rte_thread.c
> >>>+++ b/lib/eal/common/rte_thread.c
> >>>@@ -6,6 +6,12 @@
> >>> #include <rte_thread.h>
> >>> int
> >>>+rte_thread_equal(rte_thread_t t1, rte_thread_t t2)
> >>>+{
> >>>+ return t1.opaque_id == t2.opaque_id;
> >>
> >>for posix systems, why not:
> >>return pthread_equal(t1.opaque_id, t2.opaque_id);
> >
> >because it would require 2 implementations
>
> We already have plenty of such cases for rte_thread implementation.
> Why it became a problem here?
>
> when this works for both
> >windows and posix platforms. (less code to maintain, no functional
> >difference).
> >
>
> Well posix insists that the only safe way for applications to
> directly compare two pthread_t values is to call pthread_equal().
> So I'd suggest we do what is recommended.
agreed, will provide a v2 that uses pthread_equal().
