> >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 16:07:23 + Honnappa Nagarahalli
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Converting these into macros will help remove the size based
> > > > > > > duplication
> > > > of
> > > > > > APIs. I came up with the following macro:
> > >
On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 00:44:51 +
Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote:
>
>
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 16:07:23 + Honnappa Nagarahalli
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Converting these into macros will help remove the size based
> > > > > > duplication
> > > of
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 16:07:23 + Honnappa Nagarahalli
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Converting these into macros will help remove the size based
> > > > > duplication
> > of
> > > > APIs. I came up with the following macro:
> > > > >
> > > > > #define RTE_GET_BIT(nr, v
> >
> > >
> > > On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 16:07:23 +
> > > Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote:
> > >
> > > > Converting these into macros will help remove the size based
> duplication of
> > > APIs. I came up with the following macro:
> > > >
> > > > #define RTE_GET_BIT(nr, var, ret, memorder) \ ({ \
> > >
Hi Stephen, Honnappa,
> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen Hemminger
> Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2019 12:37 AM
> To: Honnappa Nagarahalli
> Cc: Joyce Kong ; tho...@monjalon.net;
> david.march...@redhat.com; m...@smartsharesystems.com;
> jer...@marvell.com; bruce.richard...@intel.com; r
On Mon, 23 Dec 2019 05:04:12 +
Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote:
>
>
> >
> > On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 16:07:23 +
> > Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote:
> >
> > > Converting these into macros will help remove the size based duplication
> > > of
> > APIs. I came up with the following macro:
> > >
On Sat, Dec 21, 2019 at 9:37 PM Honnappa Nagarahalli
wrote:
> > > +__rte_experimental
> > > +static inline uint32_t
> > > +rte_get_bit32_relaxed(unsigned int nr, uint32_t *addr) {
> > Why not pass the memory order as a parameter? It would reduce the number
> > of API calls by half.
> I think thes
>
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 16:07:23 +
> Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote:
>
> > Converting these into macros will help remove the size based duplication of
> APIs. I came up with the following macro:
> >
> > #define RTE_GET_BIT(nr, var, ret, memorder) \ ({ \
> > if (sizeof(var) == sizeof(uint32_t
>
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 16:07:23 +
> Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote:
>
> > Converting these into macros will help remove the size based duplication of
> APIs. I came up with the following macro:
> >
> > #define RTE_GET_BIT(nr, var, ret, memorder) \ ({ \
> > if (sizeof(var) == sizeof(uint32
On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 16:07:23 +
Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote:
> Converting these into macros will help remove the size based duplication of
> APIs. I came up with the following macro:
>
> #define RTE_GET_BIT(nr, var, ret, memorder) \
> ({ \
> if (sizeof(var) == sizeof(uint32_t)) { \
>
On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 16:07:23 +
Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote:
> Converting these into macros will help remove the size based duplication of
> APIs. I came up with the following macro:
>
> #define RTE_GET_BIT(nr, var, ret, memorder) \
> ({ \
> if (sizeof(var) == sizeof(uint32_t)) { \
>
> > Subject: [PATCH v6 1/6] lib/eal: implement the family of rte bit
> > operation APIs
> >
> > There are a lot functions of bit operations scattered and duplicated
> > in PMDs, consolidating them into a common API family is necessary.
> > Furthermore, when the bit operation is applied to the IO
Hi Joyce,
These APIs seem to be written considering the PMD requirements. Is
there a need to expose these to applications (external to DPDK?).
> -Original Message-
> From: Joyce Kong
> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2019 12:00 AM
> To: tho...@monjalon.net; step...@networkplumber.o
There are a lot functions of bit operations scattered and
duplicated in PMDs, consolidating them into a common API
family is necessary. Furthermore, when the bit operation
is applied to the IO devices, use __ATOMIC_ACQ_REL to
ensure the ordering for io bit operation.
Signed-off-by: Joyce Kong
Rev
14 matches
Mail list logo
