From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Varghese, Vipin" <vipin.varghese@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] doc: add NB ring comment to EAL
	"known	issues"
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 02:51:12 +0000
Message-ID: <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D2EFBC2@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com>
References: <20190110210122.24889-1-gage.eads@intel.com>
 <20190110210122.24889-7-gage.eads@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "olivier.matz@6wind.com" <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
 "arybchenko@solarflare.com" <arybchenko@solarflare.com>, "Richardson, Bruce"
 <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
 <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
To: "Eads, Gage" <gage.eads@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB8FE1B94B
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 11 Jan 2019 03:51:18 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <20190110210122.24889-7-gage.eads@intel.com>
Content-Language: en-US
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>

Hi Gage,

Humble suggestion from my end, as per DPDK 19.02-rc1 the documentation and =
code change have to be in same patch. Can you please take a look into it.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Gage Eads
> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2019 2:31 AM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: olivier.matz@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com; Richardson, Bruce
> <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 6/6] doc: add NB ring comment to EAL "known
> issues"
>=20
> This comment makes users aware of the non-blocking ring option and its
> caveats.
>=20
> Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>
> ---
>  doc/guides/prog_guide/env_abstraction_layer.rst | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>=20
> diff --git a/doc/guides/prog_guide/env_abstraction_layer.rst
> b/doc/guides/prog_guide/env_abstraction_layer.rst
> index 9497b879c..b6ac236d6 100644
> --- a/doc/guides/prog_guide/env_abstraction_layer.rst
> +++ b/doc/guides/prog_guide/env_abstraction_layer.rst
> @@ -541,7 +541,7 @@ Known Issues
>=20
>    5. It MUST not be used by multi-producer/consumer pthreads, whose
> scheduling policies are SCHED_FIFO or SCHED_RR.
>=20
> -  Alternatively, x86_64 applications can use the non-blocking stack memp=
ool
> handler. When considering this handler, note that:
> +  Alternatively, x86_64 applications can use the non-blocking ring or st=
ack
> mempool handlers. When considering one of them, note that:
>=20
>    - it is limited to the x86_64 platform, because it uses an instruction=
 (16-byte
> compare-and-swap) that is not available on other platforms.
>    - it has worse average-case performance than the non-preemptive rte_ri=
ng,
> but software caching (e.g. the mempool cache) can mitigate this by reduci=
ng
> the number of handler operations.
> --
> 2.13.6