On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 02:56:04PM -0800, Tyler Retzlaff wrote: > hi folks, > > i would like to introduce a layer of abstraction that would allow > optional use of standard C11 atomics when the platform / toolchain > combination has them available. > > making the option usable would be a phased approach intended to focus > review and minimize dealing with churn on such a broad change. > > 1. provide an initial series to add the abstraction and the ability > control enablement with a meson option enable_stdatomics=false will > be the default. > > for all existing platform / toolchain combinations the default would > remain false. i.e. i have no plans to enable it for existing platforms > toolchain combinations but leaves a change of default open to the > community as a future discussion if it is desired. > > 2. once the initial abstraction is integrated a series will be introduced to > port the tree to the abstraction with enable_stdatomics=false. the goal > being low or no change to the current use of gcc builtin C++11 memory > model atomics. > > 3. once the tree is ported a final series will be introduced to introduce > the remaining change to allow the use of enable_stdatomics=true. > > would appreciate any assistance / suggestions you can provide to > introduce the abstraction smoothly. >
Plan generally sounds ok. However, beyond point #3, would there then be plans to remove the option and always use stdatomics in future? To slightly expand the scope of the discussion - would it be worthwhile putting these abstractions in a new library in DPDK other than EAL, to start the process of splitting out some of the lower-level material from that library? /Bruce
