From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bruce Richardson Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] bonding: take queue spinlock in rx/tx burst functions Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 10:18:01 +0100 Message-ID: <20160613091800.GA17996@bricha3-MOBL3> References: <1464280727-25752-2-git-send-email-bernard.iremonger@intel.com> <1465751489-10111-1-git-send-email-bernard.iremonger@intel.com> <1465751489-10111-4-git-send-email-bernard.iremonger@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: dev@dpdk.org, declan.doherty@intel.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com To: Bernard Iremonger Return-path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DE963230 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 11:18:05 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1465751489-10111-4-git-send-email-bernard.iremonger@intel.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 06:11:28PM +0100, Bernard Iremonger wrote: > Use rte_spinlock_trylock() in the rx/tx burst functions to > take the queue spinlock. > > Signed-off-by: Bernard Iremonger > Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev > --- Why does this particular PMD need spinlocks when doing RX and TX, while other device types do not? How is adding/removing devices from a bonded device different to other control operations that can be done on physical PMDs? Is this not similar to say bringing down or hotplugging out a physical port just before an RX or TX operation takes place? For all other PMDs we rely on the app to synchronise control and data plane operation - why not here? /Bruce