From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Andre Muezerie <andremue@linux.microsoft.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com>,
David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: add deprecation notice about limit on defer queue element size
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 14:38:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5695570.h0BymrIErR@thomas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250710143747.GA24344@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net>
10/07/2025 16:37, Andre Muezerie:
> On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 04:17:20PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 23/05/2025 01:37, Andre Muezerie:
> > > The functions rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_create and rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_reclaim establish
> > > no limit on the size of each element in the defer queue.
> >
> > Very good, we need more unlimited API in DPDK.
> >
> > > With DPDK 25.11 a hard limit will be set (``RTE_QSBR_ESIZE_MAX``).
> >
> > I think it is a step in the wrong direction.
> > I prefer having no limit.
> >
> > > This will allow fixed C arrays to be used in the functions' implementations,
> > > avoiding VLAs and use of alloca().
> >
> > I don't understand this justification.
> > Why trying to remove the 2 alloca() in the lib RCU?
> >
>
> Only because other developer expressed concerns that using alloca() allows
> ill-intended callers to cause a stack overflow.
> I personally also prefer to have no hardcoded limits.
Yes I vote for keeping alloca().
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-11 12:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-22 23:37 [PATCH] rcu: add deprecation notice about limit on defer queue element size Andre Muezerie
2025-07-01 7:56 ` David Marchand
2025-07-01 14:17 ` Thomas Monjalon
2025-07-10 14:37 ` Andre Muezerie
2025-07-11 12:38 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2025-07-14 9:01 ` Konstantin Ananyev
2025-07-21 17:47 ` Thomas Monjalon
2025-08-07 19:56 ` Wathsala Vithanage
2025-08-18 13:17 ` Konstantin Ananyev
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5695570.h0BymrIErR@thomas \
--to=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=andremue@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.