From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Subject: Re: [PATCH] eal: add asynchronous request API to DPDK IPC Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2018 13:44:59 +0000 Message-ID: <3688f7bf-cc1b-de00-8567-78e9a9ead335@intel.com> References: <92186ea34a31743ed76dbd9267f0586da22575f3.1519742486.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com> <20180302105127.3e6f274f@xeon-e3> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, jianfeng.tan@intel.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B4F44C8E for ; Sat, 3 Mar 2018 14:45:02 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <20180302105127.3e6f274f@xeon-e3> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 02-Mar-18 6:51 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 14:59:29 +0000 > Anatoly Burakov wrote: > >> This API is similar to the blocking API that is already present, >> but reply will be received in a separate callback by the caller. >> >> Under the hood, we create a separate thread to deal with replies to >> asynchronous requests, that will just wait to be notified by the >> main thread, or woken up on a timer (it'll wake itself up every >> minute regardless of whether it was called, but if there are no >> requests in the queue, nothing will be done and it'll go to sleep >> for another minute). >> >> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov > > The problem with this callback model is it makes it possible to > have a single wait for multiple events model (like epoll) which > is the most scaleable way to write applications. > > I assume there's a typo in there somewhere, because the way it's written makes it look like an advantage, not a problem :) Some more details on what exactly is the issue would be welcome though. -- Thanks, Anatoly