From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
	by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB2E7A0096
	for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Mon,  8 Apr 2019 15:58:18 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E86634CA6;
	Mon,  8 Apr 2019 15:58:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-vk1-f177.google.com (mail-vk1-f177.google.com
 [209.85.221.177]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 046874C8F
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  8 Apr 2019 15:58:15 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-vk1-f177.google.com with SMTP id x84so3046325vkd.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 08 Apr 2019 06:58:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=crcqUE4u8CDmZqpLTxyYy7xjD+aCtt95F+h8PJAcdEA=;
 b=mSFgyxVbObo1G5uDSYbBkvVIw3iVtFjATtKT8s2pVibZ0rZRHUk1WlTyVDUHldsgKQ
 eAKBxOUw7fBTBYopGbLzDWewnut68rYdFkw3A+i+plP/Q7Wzp6Zfn7CI71GDB8Zw+VSe
 nMx6o8Y0PeR9lMf7kBFGGKsmL/Uh+z3+3ecUYhJAhyGBA29uYWqtlfpSeOCFHHmQt2pG
 z+MtsACYIiW+UEjG9Kapg8+ucRZ//Q9AXAS7Bd6Iq5Nr4SoHWEzbnbIojX+xC0GGyYN4
 aSf3Be0MHfUo1Hue1FmdpUx/dgFh80IPiWqS00ymg6sM4Swtqz/Zvzssi5w+0dt6f/TR
 KKSg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVulMK1b115kTL1lXKEVfMeWj19FecwJhKhsZDZ6fd/iVSXg95V
 D/Nkwd42o0UAQQ52IOdWA9qncSqA11bhPk94dPY4PA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy6oo729sfA5H/ocyDesPO9gd+Y74op06wjcVYBLFamkKWNVJyjjvmxupipiO8/wHxn0qV0S+uApmLXcNrTlWg=
X-Received: by 2002:a1f:7d4e:: with SMTP id y75mr16118274vkc.53.1554731895175; 
 Mon, 08 Apr 2019 06:58:15 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <c0856556-a42e-d0cf-6a01-6279643c8089@ashroe.eu>
 <d9edf2cb-6894-b794-1402-0e1d11701deb@ashroe.eu>
 <455a61b4-891d-eaaf-d784-2be884bcacbd@intel.com>
 <7166381.CkH77a7QuE@xps> <5e27f573-bbf5-30f1-73ee-d35fc5191632@ashroe.eu>
 <e7042d7c-d7d6-1332-ff69-0ff24b300ebd@intel.com>
 <c79ff6e8-6b53-66e9-9e34-76f2f86079f7@ashroe.eu>
 <6a9bf695-b287-9e5e-358c-d6c3f93db045@intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <6a9bf695-b287-9e5e-358c-d6c3f93db045@intel.com>
From: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 15:58:03 +0200
Message-ID:
 <CAJFAV8wLD22Oxe-EHESKuReM1VScx7B0aU+i1fVMDXLUH0sEbA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Cc: Ray Kinsella <mdr@ashroe.eu>, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
 techboard@dpdk.org, 
 Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, dev <dev@dpdk.org>, 
 Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-techboard] DPDK ABI/API Stability
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
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>
Message-ID: <20190408135803.0gOK3eTtZ_RxLfgEVT2e7_ikp9X0iUxYCtqiS_EvUqY@z>

On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 3:39 PM Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
wrote:

> As a concrete proposal, my number one dream would be to see multiprocess
> gone. I also recall desire for "DPDK to be more lightweight", and i
> maintain that DPDK *cannot* be lightweight if we are to support
> multiprocess - we can have one or the other, but not both. However,
> realistically, i don't think dropping multiprocess is ever going to
> happen - not only it is too entrenched in DPDK use cases, it is actually
> quite useful despite its flaws.
>

Well, honestly, I'd like to hear about this.
What are the real usecases for multi process support?
Do we have even a single opensource project that uses it?


-- 
David Marchand