From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DB55A0548; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 21:41:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4D504145F; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 21:41:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3926B41448 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 21:41:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 784565C006E; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 15:41:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 19 Apr 2021 15:41:06 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm1; bh= tvvym48AsLFgzX9xBm/9UyEJprXnjG/7rrYaAws4jAo=; b=FnTJL8mxQHEgm+rX r9AkfV1cx7UBlp9AqtkrSshMHn2Q8FRdsW2T43ZnR5/RBCOXx9jJoBYjljv8fBXt aSOWa6LFXrPLusPq7sMJagDphC1NMXT3ksGZFUMuoNipFZc+dxOQHCJs36IrZyZE 4dIWy4xk+TngreChlxt0ItGROuH7140sxM0LTgbWMjms4pp8BcRWOQFxb7TGn6ZB cRfVzn2Q7A2FIUwlQhg8fpabptJ4GIuAe2x3zgzWAIEwiwcfsCKunjwKPHKsdIJb wnkePMLnC3D1Lhof46LZfFbmc3RLX9wZt7KZ0pkawkOR36BitQuGSuL7MBv75Bag BIuD+A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=tvvym48AsLFgzX9xBm/9UyEJprXnjG/7rrYaAws4j Ao=; b=sXNlXNIPXD+85F0gkYsVITkEYLFZTE/rkBKc0A0lqeoyEYxiszlHtV1Ll auWD8O1sw90lOw5fBObw3ycx3D/OGi7gQGoGfonqXqQIM2tDpFL6XANdJlTRmP1C QgrQYA0WiyfgJcM3K+NUsOUZpEg4S92CXAZHl4mhiuAesqT1AvpeteBxkjMWyLNG Po3j/l/USXM0YEbVG1P8eMM8YeOueIybmHTMqT2Mdt2GcNwjh56zOXt5T9v0zl46 vB/XpJXuT5SCdZh3jNNwIl0uVvOTShXIb4t4bzQhwe4tzYCj0WEWGN6+kfQxvaPj hMNZEFJHF2V6x7i2JBHlWKQOfMvvw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrvddtgedgudegvdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdej ueeiiedvffegheenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrh fuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgr lhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A4CBA1080068; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 15:41:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Tyler Retzlaff Cc: Jie Zhou , Dmitry Kozlyuk , Tal Shnaiderman , "dev@dpdk.org" , "xiaoyun.li@intel.com" , "Kadam, Pallavi" , "bruce.richardson@intel.com" , "ferruh.yigit@intel.com" , "david.marchand@redhat.com" Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 21:41:02 +0200 Message-ID: <1624822.LYVHZhtJzb@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <1618594501-23795-10-git-send-email-jizh@linux.microsoft.com> <3990047.YzQW8q25Qq@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH v5 5/9] app/testpmd: add clock_gettime_monotonic X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 19/04/2021 20:34, Tyler Retzlaff: > > > Originally and internally, the function was added into eal. But then > > > restricted the functionality just inside testpmd to avoid currently > > > seems unnecessary version change, per a discussion in community meeting > > > several weeks back. If we believe eal support of clock_gettime for > > > windows will benefit other drivers/apps now instead of future when real > > > need comes up, I can move it back into eal. DmitryK and Tyler, any > > > conern or inputs here? > > > > My point of view: > > A test application is also testing the API availability. > > Here it shows something is missing in EAL. > > Instead of workarounding in the test application, it should direct you to > > fixing EAL. > > I think we have discussed to some degree in other threads but the more POSIX interfaces that get integrated into eal with an 'rte_' namespace pasted on to the front of them causes the scale of making DPDK portable grows. If individual applications need portable/cross platform APIs like they should look to other packages tailored for the job instead of trying to put everything into DPDK. Threads is an example of where this has gone wrong, I don't think doing more of it is going to be beneficial. > > Shouldn't EAL be in the business of being DPDK and do it well instead of an all encompassing cross-platform application development kit? Yes good point.