From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 4/4] doc: add note about
 rte_vhost_enqueue_burst thread safety.
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 12:05:14 +0300
Message-ID: <56C6DACA.7040109@samsung.com>
References: <1455863563-15751-1-git-send-email-i.maximets@samsung.com>
 <1455863563-15751-5-git-send-email-i.maximets@samsung.com>
 <20160219071046.GT21426@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <C37D651A908B024F974696C65296B57B4C5E7788@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, Dyasly Sergey <s.dyasly@samsung.com>
To: "Xie, Huawei" <huawei.xie@intel.com>,
 Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mailout1.w1.samsung.com (mailout1.w1.samsung.com
 [210.118.77.11]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED1C6C49C
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 19 Feb 2016 10:15:17 +0100 (CET)
Received: from eucpsbgm1.samsung.com (unknown [203.254.199.244])
 by mailout1.w1.samsung.com
 (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.31.0 64bit (built May 5 2014))
 with ESMTP id <0O2S005G9EKRGJA0@mailout1.w1.samsung.com> for dev@dpdk.org;
 Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:05:15 +0000 (GMT)
In-reply-to: <C37D651A908B024F974696C65296B57B4C5E7788@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 19.02.2016 11:36, Xie, Huawei wrote:
> On 2/19/2016 3:10 PM, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 09:32:43AM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@samsung.com>
>>> ---
>>>  doc/guides/prog_guide/thread_safety_dpdk_functions.rst | 1 +
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/doc/guides/prog_guide/thread_safety_dpdk_functions.rst b/doc/guides/prog_guide/thread_safety_dpdk_functions.rst
>>> index 403e5fc..13a6c89 100644
>>> --- a/doc/guides/prog_guide/thread_safety_dpdk_functions.rst
>>> +++ b/doc/guides/prog_guide/thread_safety_dpdk_functions.rst
>>> @@ -67,6 +67,7 @@ then locking, or some other form of mutual exclusion, is necessary.
>>>  The ring library is based on a lockless ring-buffer algorithm that maintains its original design for thread safety.
>>>  Moreover, it provides high performance for either multi- or single-consumer/producer enqueue/dequeue operations.
>>>  The mempool library is based on the DPDK lockless ring library and therefore is also multi-thread safe.
>>> +rte_vhost_enqueue_burst() is also thread safe because based on lockless ring-buffer algorithm like the ring library.
>> FYI, Huawei meant to make rte_vhost_enqueue_burst() not be thread-safe,
>> to aligh with the usage of rte_eth_tx_burst().
>>
>> 	--yliu
> 
> I have a patch to remove the lockless enqueue. Unless there is strong
> reason, i prefer vhost PMD to behave like other PMDs, with no internal
> lockless algorithm. In future, for people who really need it, we could
> have dynamic/static switch to enable it.

OK, got it. So, I think, this documentation patch may be dropped.
Other patches of series still may be merged to fix existing issues and
keep code in consistent state for the future.
Am I right?

Best regards, Ilya Maximets.