Right, the threads using the DPDK libraries must do the right RCU stuff, declare quiescent, etc.
I mentioned hooks to address the licensing issue. So for places in rte_hash were synchronization must be done a no-op function could be called but users could replace that function with one of their choosing. Thanks, Jim On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 6:14 PM, Stephen Hemminger < step...@networkplumber.org> wrote: > On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:48:50 -0700 > Jim Murphy <jmur...@arista.com> wrote: > > > Anecdotally I've heard that the urcu hash implementation is slower than > > rte_hash based on pure lookup performance. Has anyone considered adding > RCU > > hooks into rte_hash? > > > Not really possible with DPDK (as I said earlier) because DPDK does not > have concept > of thread quiescent period to allow for safe deletion. You could manually > use RCU > concepts of RCU and RTE hash; it would require using userspace RCU > primitives > inside DPDK. This would cause a dependency that would prevent that from > ever > being merged upstream due to license conflict; but since DPDK is liberal > BSD > license you are free to do it and maintain it on your own. >
