From: "lihuisong (C)" <lihuisong@huawei.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>, <sivaprasad.tummala@amd.com>,
<dev@dpdk.org>, <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
<fengchengwen@huawei.com>, <yangxingui@huawei.com>,
<zhanjie9@hisilicon.com>, <lihuisong@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/10] eal: add interface to check if lcore is EAL managed
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2026 14:16:49 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e616b775-d447-47c3-bc79-e67b2efad636@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <vMlZoeDqTD6UrHS2wuWBKw@monjalon.net>
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for your review.
On 6/11/2026 7:28 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 22/05/2026 06:11, Huisong Li:
>> Add a new helper function rte_lcore_is_eal_managed() to determine
>> if a logical core is managed by EAL.
>>
>> This interface returns true if the lcore role is either ROLE_RTE
>> (standard worker/main cores) or ROLE_SERVICE (service cores).
> [...]
>> +RTE_EXPORT_EXPERIMENTAL_SYMBOL(rte_lcore_is_eal_managed, 26.07)
>> +int rte_lcore_is_eal_managed(unsigned int lcore_id)
>> +{
>> + struct rte_config *cfg = rte_eal_get_configuration();
>> +
>> + if (lcore_id >= RTE_MAX_LCORE)
>> + return 0;
>> + return cfg->lcore_role[lcore_id] == ROLE_RTE ||
>> + cfg->lcore_role[lcore_id] == ROLE_SERVICE;
>> +}
> I'm not sure about adding this function in the API.
> We already have rte_eal_lcore_role()
> and I feel having this explicit ROLE_RTE || ROLE_SERVICE
> in the code where needed may be less confusing.
Ack.
>
> Note: we should prefix these constants with RTE_LCORE_
Yeah, it's good.
This will break API. And we can do this in 26.11.
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-11 6:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-22 4:11 [PATCH v3 00/10] power: centralize lcore ID verification in cpufreq framework Huisong Li
2026-05-22 4:11 ` [PATCH v3 01/10] eal: add interface to check if lcore is EAL managed Huisong Li
2026-06-10 23:28 ` Thomas Monjalon
2026-06-11 6:16 ` lihuisong (C) [this message]
2026-06-11 9:10 ` Thomas Monjalon
2026-06-15 1:08 ` lihuisong (C)
2026-05-22 4:11 ` [PATCH v3 02/10] power: add a common macro to verify lcore ID Huisong Li
2026-05-22 4:11 ` [PATCH v3 03/10] power/cpufreq: add the lcore ID verification to framework Huisong Li
2026-05-22 4:11 ` [PATCH v3 04/10] power/acpi: remove redundant lcore ID checks Huisong Li
2026-05-22 4:11 ` [PATCH v3 05/10] power/amd_pstate: " Huisong Li
2026-05-22 4:11 ` [PATCH v3 06/10] power/cppc: " Huisong Li
2026-05-22 4:11 ` [PATCH v3 07/10] power/intel_pstate: " Huisong Li
2026-05-22 4:11 ` [PATCH v3 08/10] power/kvm_vm: " Huisong Li
2026-05-22 4:11 ` [PATCH v3 09/10] power: allow the service core to config power QoS Huisong Li
2026-05-22 4:11 ` [PATCH v3 10/10] power: add lcore ID check for PMD mgmt Huisong Li
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=e616b775-d447-47c3-bc79-e67b2efad636@huawei.com \
--to=lihuisong@huawei.com \
--cc=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=fengchengwen@huawei.com \
--cc=sivaprasad.tummala@amd.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=yangxingui@huawei.com \
--cc=zhanjie9@hisilicon.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox