> From: Tyler Retzlaff [mailto:roret...@linux.microsoft.com]
> Sent: Friday, 11 August 2023 19.32
>
> Adapt bpf for EAL optional atomics API changes
>
> Signed-off-by: Tyler Retzlaff <roret...@linux.microsoft.com>
> ---
> lib/bpf/bpf_pkt.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_pkt.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_pkt.c
> index ffd2db7..b300447 100644
> --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_pkt.c
> +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_pkt.c
> @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
>
> struct bpf_eth_cbi {
> /* used by both data & control path */
> - uint32_t use; /*usage counter */
> + uint32_t __rte_atomic use; /*usage counter */
As mentioned in my review to the 2/6 patch, I think __rte_atomic should come
before the type, like this:
__rte_atomic uint32_t use; /*usage counter */
> const struct rte_eth_rxtx_callback *cb; /* callback handle */
> struct rte_bpf *bpf;
> struct rte_bpf_jit jit;
> @@ -110,8 +110,8 @@ struct bpf_eth_cbh {
>
> /* in use, busy wait till current RX/TX iteration is finished */
> if ((puse & BPF_ETH_CBI_INUSE) != 0) {
> - RTE_WAIT_UNTIL_MASKED((uint32_t *)(uintptr_t)&cbi->use,
> - UINT32_MAX, !=, puse, __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> + RTE_WAIT_UNTIL_MASKED((uint32_t __rte_atomic
> *)(uintptr_t)&cbi->use,
And here:
RTE_WAIT_UNTIL_MASKED((__rte_atomic uint32_t *) [...]
> + UINT32_MAX, !=, puse, rte_memory_order_relaxed);
> }
> }
>
> --
> 1.8.3.1
Reviewed-by: Morten Brørup <m...@smartsharesystems.com>
