02/11/2023 04:04, Tyler Retzlaff:
> Replace use of __atomic_thread_fence with __rte_atomic_thread_fence.
>
> It may be appropriate to use rte_atomic_thread_fence instead but it
> will be up to maintainers to evaluate and make the change if appropriate.
I don't understand the use of __rte_atomic_thread_fence
which is supposed to be EAL-internal only, isn't it?
On x86, we have this:
static __rte_always_inline void
rte_atomic_thread_fence(rte_memory_order memorder)
{
if (memorder == rte_memory_order_seq_cst)
rte_smp_mb();
else
__rte_atomic_thread_fence(memorder);
}
This is skipped if you use __rte_atomic_thread_fence() directly.
