On 23 April 2015 at 13:13, Ola Liljedahl <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 23 April 2015 at 12:14, Taras Kondratiuk <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On 04/22/2015 09:21 PM, Mike Holmes wrote: >> >>> We have mentioned EOs in only one place and not defined them any where >>> in the API doc >>> >>> /** >>> * Set queue context >>> * >>> * Its the responsability of the interface user to make sure >>> * queue context allocation is done in an area reachable for >>> * all EOs accessing the context >>> >> Even if we avoid using the term EO (Execution Object) as Taras suggests > (and I agree), the description above is not very clear (understatement). > What is probably meant is that it is the responsibility of the user to > ensure that the queue context is accessible by all threads that attempt to > access it. As an example, if using the ODP (multi)process model, queue > contexts should be allocated from ODP shared memory (including pools using > shared memory) and not from some per-process allocator (e.g. malloc). > > Ola you have made the mistake of appearing knowledgeable ;) I may quote you in a patch to fix this documentation. However in your description you also use the term thread and process which are in my mind equally bad terms to EO but in this case they mean something to Linux rather than Open Event Machine. I am being pedantic to try to get clarity but should the terminology be:- It is the responsibility of the user to ensure that the queue context is accessible by all odp_tasks that attempt to access it. As an example, if using the multi odp_task model, queue contexts should be allocated from ODP shared memory (including pools using shared memory) and not from some per odp_task allocator (e.g. malloc). > > * >>> * @param queue Queue handle >>> * @param context Address to the queue context >>> * >>> * @retval 0 on success >>> * @retval <0 on failure >>> */ >>> int odp_queue_set_context(odp_queue_t queue, void *context); >>> >>> Should we add a Glossary and define odp_workers and execution objects >>> etc? >>> >>> Should we fix this instance to just say "all threads accessing the >>> content" becasue we already use the term "thread" extensively in the API >>> docs ? >>> >>> Thread feels very Linux specific and we dont really mean a thread since >>> it could be a process even for Linux. >>> >> >> Execution Object has different meaning in Open Event Machine framework. >> We should avoid using Execution Object name for ODP workers. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lng-odp mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp >> > > -- Mike Holmes Technical Manager - Linaro Networking Group Linaro.org <http://www.linaro.org/> *│ *Open source software for ARM SoCs
_______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
