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-boun...@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Gage Eads > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2019 2:31 AM > To: dev@dpdk.org > Cc: olivier.m...@6wind.com; arybche...@solarflare.com; Richardson, Bruce > <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin > <konstantin.anan...@intel.com> > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 6/6] doc: add NB ring comment to EAL "known > issues" > > This comment makes users aware of the non-blocking ring option and its > caveats. > > Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.e...@intel.com> > --- > doc/guides/prog_guide/env_abstraction_layer.rst | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > 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 > > 5. It MUST not be used by multi-producer/consumer pthreads, whose > scheduling policies are SCHED_FIFO or SCHED_RR. > > - Alternatively, x86_64 applications can use the non-blocking stack mempool > handler. When considering this handler, note that: > + Alternatively, x86_64 applications can use the non-blocking ring or stack > mempool handlers. When considering one of them, note that: > > - 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_ring, > but software caching (e.g. the mempool cache) can mitigate this by reducing > the number of handler operations. > -- > 2.13.6
