From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] app/test: enable test_red to build on
	non x86 platform
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 11:04:32 +0200
Message-ID: <1740827.rQGZo3YydZ@xps13>
References: <1439901605-31164-1-git-send-email-jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
 <1759749.jiktJN44xV@xps13> <20150827040839.GA5223@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com (mail-wi0-f174.google.com
 [209.85.212.174]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC4BA591A
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 11:05:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by wicgk12 with SMTP id gk12so2366741wic.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 02:05:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20150827040839.GA5223@localhost.localdomain>
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>

2015-08-27 09:38, Jerin Jacob:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 02:03:13PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 2015-08-18 18:10, Jerin Jacob:
> > > --- a/app/test/test_red.c
> > > +++ b/app/test/test_red.c
> > > +#if defined(RTE_ARCH_X86_64) || defined(RTE_ARCH_I686) || defined(RTE_ARCH_X86_X32)
> > >  #ifdef __PIC__
> > >      asm volatile (
> > >      "mov %%ebx, %%edi\n"
> > > @@ -155,6 +156,7 @@ static inline void rdtsc_prof_start(struct rdtsc_prof *p)
> > >  #else
> > >  	asm( "cpuid" : : : "%eax", "%ebx", "%ecx", "%edx" );
> > >  #endif
> > > +#endif
> > >  	p->clk_start = rte_rdtsc();
> > 
> > The right fix would be to move that arch-specific code into an EAL abstraction.
> 
> I agree. I thought the same. But I am not able to understand why 'cpuid'
> instruction used here without any input/output parameters. What is the
> role of 'cpuid' instruction in this specific function and what to
> abstract in eal ?

It is explained here:
	http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-January/001182.html

I think it can be replaced by rte_rdtsc_precise() which was implemented
after the above discussion. It uses rte_mb instead of cpuid.

As explained in the following thread, memory fence can be used instead of cpuid:
	http://stackoverflow.com/a/12634857
As showed in the following threads, rdtscp can also be used:
	http://stackoverflow.com/a/27697754
	http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-April/016770.html

It reminds me that we should deprecate rte_rdtsc() and rte_get_tsc_cycles() in
favor of a more generic name, e.g. rte_get_clock_cycles().