On 2024-02-27 10:58, Morten Brørup wrote:
From: Mattias Rönnblom [mailto:mattias.ronnb...@ericsson.com]
Sent: Sunday, 25 February 2024 16.03
[...]
+static void *
+lcore_var_alloc(size_t size, size_t align)
+{
+ void *handle;
+ void *value;
+
+ offset = RTE_ALIGN_CEIL(offset, align);
+
+ if (offset + size > RTE_MAX_LCORE_VAR) {
This would be the usual comparison:
if (lcore_buffer == NULL) {
+ lcore_buffer = aligned_alloc(RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE,
+ LCORE_BUFFER_SIZE);
+ RTE_VERIFY(lcore_buffer != NULL);
+
+ offset = 0;
+ }
[...]
+/**
+ * Define a lcore variable handle.
+ *
+ * This macro defines a variable which is used as a handle to access
+ * the various per-lcore id instances of a per-lcore id variable.
+ *
+ * The aim with this macro is to make clear at the point of
+ * declaration that this is an lcore handler, rather than a regular
+ * pointer.
+ *
+ * Add @b static as a prefix in case the lcore variable are only to be
+ * accessed from a particular translation unit.
+ */
+#define RTE_LCORE_VAR_HANDLE(type, name) \
+ RTE_LCORE_VAR_HANDLE_TYPE(type) name
+
The parameter is "name" here, and "handle" in other macros.
Just mentioning to make sure you thought about it.
+/**
+ * Get pointer to lcore variable instance with the specified lcore id.
+ */
+#define RTE_LCORE_VAR_LCORE_PTR(lcore_id, handle) \
+ ((typeof(handle))__rte_lcore_var_lcore_ptr(lcore_id, handle))
+
+/**
+ * Get value of a lcore variable instance of the specified lcore id.
+ */
+#define RTE_LCORE_VAR_LCORE_GET(lcore_id, handle) \
+ (*(RTE_LCORE_VAR_LCORE_PTR(lcore_id, handle)))
+
+/**
+ * Set the value of a lcore variable instance of the specified lcore id.
+ */
+#define RTE_LCORE_VAR_LCORE_SET(lcore_id, handle, value) \
+ (*(RTE_LCORE_VAR_LCORE_PTR(lcore_id, handle)) = (value))
I still think RTE_LCORE_VAR[_LCORE]_PTR() suffice, and
RTE_LCORE_VAR[_LCORE]_GET/SET are superfluous.
But I don't insist on their removal. :-)
I'll remove them. One can always add them later. Nothing I've seen in
the DPDK code base so far has been called for their use.
Should the RTE_LCORE_VAR_PTR() be renamed RTE_LCORE_VAR_VALUE() (and
still return a pointer, obviously)? "PTR" seems a little superfluous
(Hungarian). "RTE_LCORE_VAR()" would be short, but not very descriptive.
With or without suggested changes...
For the series,
Acked-by: Morten Brørup <m...@smartsharesystems.com>
Thanks for all help.
