Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2 1/4] power: fix non thread-safe power env modification

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

28/10/2020 14:53, David Hunt:
> On 25/10/2020 6:22 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 29/03/2019 16:09, Burakov, Anatoly:
> >> On 29-Mar-19 2:14 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >>> 18/03/2019 12:56, Hajkowski:
> >>>> From: Marcin Hajkowski <marcinx.hajkowski@intel.com>
> >>>> --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_19_05.rst
> >>>> +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_19_05.rst
> >>>> @@ -120,6 +120,8 @@ API Changes
> >>>> +   * power: ``rte_power_set_env`` and ``rte_power_unset_env`` functions
> >>>> +     have been modified to be thread safe.
> >>> The deprecation notice was recently sent,
> >>> so I guess this patch is for DPDK 19.08.
> >> Yes, this is changing API so the target was 19.08. However, first patch
> >> is a fix and can be applied to 19.05 as well. The API documentation
> >> stated that the function was not thread safe, but the code itself was
> >> thread safe (it wasn't because it was buggy, but the intention of being
> >> thread safe was there), so this could be considered fixing docs to match
> >> the intended behavior of the code.
> >>
> >>> Review from the maintainer (David) may help.
> >>> Thanks
> > What is the follow-up here?
> > We still have an old deprecation notice:
> > 	http://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/commit/?id=3477b7a2cc
> >
> > I wonder how such things can be forgotten.
> > I feel some help is needed in prioritization,
> > so let's consider this deprecation as the priority #1
> > gating any other change in the power library.
> 
> 
> Hi Thomas,
> 
> #1 is now done, I've pushed a patch removing the deprication notice to 
> the mailing list, as the change it describes had previously been applied.
> Patch here: http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/82327/
> 
> 
> > Priority #2: cleaning up API which are secretly exported
> > for example convenience. It is an old design issue never fixed:
> > 	http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/6046120.mQ0ExDuKPD@thomas/
> 
> 
> Regarding the virtio channel API, Bruce and I had a look at this, and I 
> think I need to do some more research into it. I'd prefer not to make 
> that API public, as it was intended to be mainly for the 
> vm_power_manager app and the companion guest_cli.
> 
> So I'll look into this, and look at the best way to proceed with 
> cleaning this up so that these apps can be build using meson/ninja as 
> part of DPDK, as well as using 'make' extrernal to DPDK.
> 
> I hope to push up an RFC next week so we can get agreement on the best 
> path forward on this item.
> 
> 
> >
> > Priority #3: request feedbacks from other maintainers
> > to add a generic API in ethdev to get a hook for power management.
> >
> 
> Would it be possible to look at #2 and #3 in parallel? I'm not sure I'd 
> have #2 done fully in time for this release, and, if not, I will make 
> sure it's done for 21.02.

Yes I'm looking at #3 in parallel but the ethdev API is really
not clear enough.