From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/8] hash: add read and write concurrency
 support
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:49:07 -0700
Message-ID: <20180711134907.01d8eaf0@xeon-e3>
References: <1528455078-328182-1-git-send-email-yipeng1.wang@intel.com>
 <1531242001-381104-1-git-send-email-yipeng1.wang@intel.com>
 <1531242001-381104-6-git-send-email-yipeng1.wang@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com, dev@dpdk.org,
 bruce.richardson@intel.com, honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com,
 vguvva@caviumnetworks.com, brijesh.s.singh@gmail.com
To: Yipeng Wang <yipeng1.wang@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-pf0-f193.google.com (mail-pf0-f193.google.com
 [209.85.192.193]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04F601B54E
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 22:49:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-pf0-f193.google.com with SMTP id s21-v6so19173934pfm.6
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:49:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1531242001-381104-6-git-send-email-yipeng1.wang@intel.com>
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
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 09:59:58 -0700
Yipeng Wang <yipeng1.wang@intel.com> wrote:

> +
> +static inline void
> +__hash_rw_reader_lock(const struct rte_hash *h)
> +{
> +	if (h->readwrite_concur_support && h->hw_trans_mem_support)
> +		rte_rwlock_read_lock_tm(h->readwrite_lock);
> +	else if (h->readwrite_concur_support)
> +		rte_rwlock_read_lock(h->readwrite_lock);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void
> +__hash_rw_writer_unlock(const struct rte_hash *h)
> +{
> +	if (h->multi_writer_support && h->hw_trans_mem_support)
> +		rte_rwlock_write_unlock_tm(h->readwrite_lock);
> +	else if (h->multi_writer_support)
> +		rte_rwlock_write_unlock(h->readwrite_lock);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void
> +__hash_rw_reader_unlock(const struct rte_hash *h)
> +{
> +	if (h->readwrite_concur_support && h->hw_trans_mem_support)
> +		rte_rwlock_read_unlock_tm(h->readwrite_lock);
> +	else if (h->readwrite_concur_support)
> +		rte_rwlock_read_unlock(h->readwrite_lock);
> +}
> +

For small windows, reader-writer locks are slower than a spin lock
because there are more cache bounces.