From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF366C54E41
	for <dpdk-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue,  5 Mar 2024 20:18:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0970B402B2;
	Tue,  5 Mar 2024 21:18:24 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (mail.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.3])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11F89402AC
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue,  5 Mar 2024 21:18:22 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3A99FA05
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue,  5 Mar 2024 21:18:21 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix, from userid 1004)
 id B766EFA04; Tue,  5 Mar 2024 21:18:21 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.168.1.59] (h-62-63-215-114.A163.priv.bahnhof.se
 [62.63.215.114])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 97213FA03;
 Tue,  5 Mar 2024 21:18:20 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <0024db51-8b39-4aa7-969a-bde86fe1c764@lysator.liu.se>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2024 21:18:20 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
To: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: Tyler Retzlaff <roretzla@linux.microsoft.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Mattias_R=C3=B6nnblom?= <hofors@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RTE lock
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org

Shouldn't we have a DPDK-native mutex API, rather than using direct 
POSIX mutex lock calls?

There are two reasons for this, as I see it
1) more cleanly support non-POSIX operating system (i.e., Microsoft 
Windows).
2) to discourage mechanical use of spinlocks in places where a regular 
mutex lock is more appropriate.

I think (and hope) DPDK developers will tend to pick DPDK-native rather 
than other APIs as their first choice.

For locks, they go for spinlocks, even in control (non-fast 
path/non-packet processing) code paths (e.g., calls made by the typical 
non-EAL thread).

Using spinlocks to synchronize threads that may be preempted aren't 
great idea.