From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 1/3] vhost: use SMP barriers instead
 of compiler ones.
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 13:39:13 +0300
Message-ID: <56EBDAD1.1090608@samsung.com>
References: <1456314438-4021-1-git-send-email-i.maximets@samsung.com>
 <1456314438-4021-2-git-send-email-i.maximets@samsung.com>
 <C37D651A908B024F974696C65296B57B4C677A7D@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <56EBD718.8010604@samsung.com>
 <C37D651A908B024F974696C65296B57B4C677D03@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Dyasly Sergey <s.dyasly@samsung.com>,
 Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>,
 Jianbo Liu <jianbo.liu@linaro.org>,
 Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>, Tetsuya Mukawa <mukawa@igel.co.jp>
To: "Xie, Huawei" <huawei.xie@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
 Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mailout4.w1.samsung.com (mailout4.w1.samsung.com
 [210.118.77.14]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 503A22BD7
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 11:39:16 +0100 (CET)
Received: from eucpsbgm1.samsung.com (unknown [203.254.199.244])
 by mailout4.w1.samsung.com
 (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.31.0 64bit (built May 5 2014))
 with ESMTP id <0O4800215DLEUH90@mailout4.w1.samsung.com> for dev@dpdk.org;
 Fri, 18 Mar 2016 10:39:14 +0000 (GMT)
In-reply-to: <C37D651A908B024F974696C65296B57B4C677D03@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>



On 18.03.2016 13:27, Xie, Huawei wrote:
> On 3/18/2016 6:23 PM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>> On 18.03.2016 13:08, Xie, Huawei wrote:
>>> On 2/24/2016 7:47 PM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>>>>  		 * Wait until it's our turn to add our buffer
>>>> @@ -979,7 +979,7 @@ rte_vhost_dequeue_burst(struct virtio_net *dev, uint16_t queue_id,
>>>>  		entry_success++;
>>>>  	}
>>>>  
>>>> -	rte_compiler_barrier();
>>>> +	rte_smp_rmb();
>>> smp_rmb()?
>> There is no such function 'smp_rmb' in DPDK.
>> But:
>> .../arch/arm/rte_atomic.h:#define rte_smp_rmb() rte_rmb()
>> .../arch/ppc_64/rte_atomic.h:#define rte_smp_rmb() rte_compiler_barrier()
>> .../arch/tile/rte_atomic.h:#define rte_smp_rmb() rte_compiler_barrier()
>> .../arch/x86/rte_atomic.h:#define rte_smp_rmb() rte_compiler_barrier()
> 
> I mean shoudn't be rte_smp_wmb()?

No. Here we need to be sure that copying of data from descriptor to
our local mbuf completed before 'vq->used->idx += entry_success;'.

Read memory barrier will help us with it.

In other places write barriers used because copying performed in
opposite direction.

> 
>>
>>>>  	vq->used->idx += entry_success;
>>>>  	vhost_log_used_vring(dev, vq, offsetof(struct vring_used, idx),
>>>>  			sizeof(vq->used->idx));
>>>> -- 2.5.0
>>>
>>>
> 
> 
>