From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A9971075; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 20:06:44 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=intel; t=1489691205; x=1521227205; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=Mx9AArzInGBVtNGts9W3ZYGzjgHG1ExS6X3E8qvPkng=; b=nWeyJELrKqK4mY3XS7wiQSr6pZu/cnm15F4oBgAFwBrWnDr6D1ggAFlY KQcXzNYMwmO4wr15AHDQoWpeatgBxw==; Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Mar 2017 12:06:43 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.36,173,1486454400"; d="scan'208";a="61352042" Received: from irsmsx102.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.155]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Mar 2017 12:06:41 -0700 Received: from irsmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.11.173]) by IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.230]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 19:06:40 +0000 From: "Dumitrescu, Cristian" To: Thomas Monjalon , "Ananyev, Konstantin" CC: "O'Driscoll, Tim" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com" , "balasubramanian.manoharan@cavium.com" , "hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" , "shreyansh.jain@nxp.com" , "Wiles, Keith" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "techboard@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [PATCH v3 2/2] ethdev: add hierarchical scheduler API Thread-Index: AQHSlmXkX5aIvTYL1U6GZzZccGSDv6GIAuLQgAA63gCAAYJR4IAA9luAgAOvgTCAB4DRgIABtthggAArfYCAAACBcIAACuyAgAAO8HA= Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 19:06:39 +0000 Message-ID: <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D8912652761294@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1488589820-206947-1-git-send-email-cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com> <4544430.1vcQTJXfeh@xps13> <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891265276121D@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> <3089139.1r3dZqkNdq@xps13> In-Reply-To: <3089139.1r3dZqkNdq@xps13> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiZTMzNzIzNDItYzg2ZS00NGQ2LWJjM2EtZmMyYWFmOTQ0YzEyIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX0lDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE2LjUuOS4zIiwiVHJ1c3RlZExhYmVsSGFzaCI6IkhiK2QyQ0hHWmFMTlRQWHFUZEJVNnpCK2VKUTYzcGNJcFJHOGRVZ0hWMEU9In0= x-ctpclassification: CTP_IC x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.180] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/2] ethdev: add hierarchical scheduler API X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 19:06:45 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 6:11 PM > To: Dumitrescu, Cristian ; Ananyev, > Konstantin > Cc: O'Driscoll, Tim ; dev@dpdk.org; > jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com; > balasubramanian.manoharan@cavium.com; hemant.agrawal@nxp.com; > shreyansh.jain@nxp.com; Wiles, Keith ; Richardson, > Bruce ; techboard@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ethdev: add hierarchical scheduler API >=20 > 2017-03-16 17:40, Dumitrescu, Cristian: > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > > 2017-03-16 16:23, Dumitrescu, Cristian: > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > Thomas, given Tim's confirmation of Intel's plans to implement = this > API > > > for > > > > > the ixgbe and i40e drivers in DPDK release 17.8, are you in favou= r of > > > including > > > > > this API in 17.5 with experimental tag (subject to full API agree= ment > being > > > > > reached)? > > > > > > > > > > I think starting a branch in a dedicated "next" repo is a better > approach. > > > > > rte_flow and eventdev were (and will be) integrated only when at > least > > > one > > > > > hardware device is supported. > > > > > I suggest to follow the same workflow. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas, if this is the only path forward you are willing to support= , then > let's > > > go this way, but let's make sure we are all on the same page with the > terms > > > and conditions that apply. > > > > > > > > Do you agree now to merge this next-tree to DPDK once this API is > > > implemented for at least one PMD? We would like to avoid getting any > last > > > minute objections from you or anybody else on the fundamentals; if yo= u > > > have any, please let's discuss them now. > > > > > > At least one "hardware" PMD, yes. It would prove the API can work for > real. > > > About accepting it definitely in a given release, it will be checked > > > with the technical board on Monday. > > > > > > > OK, great, thank you. Is the agenda of the technical board meetings > published in advance somewhere? >=20 > For the previous meeting, it was published: > https://bimestriel.framapad.org/p/r.a5199d22813a5ac79d1d365b9ce > cb905 > For the next one, please Konstantin, could you publish the agenda on a pa= d? >=20 > > > > How do we manage the API freeze on the next-tree? Once the API is > > > agreed, we would like to freeze it so the driver development can > proceed; > > > we can then do some reasonably small changes to the API based on the > > > learnings we get during driver development. We would like to welcome > any > > > parties interested in contributing to join Cavium, Intel and NXP in t= his > effort, > > > but we would like to avoid any last minute major API change requests. > > > > > > You are taking it the wrong way. Your main concern is to not be distu= rbed > > > with change requests. It should be the contrary: you have a chance to > > > work with other vendors to test and improve the API. > > > You should embrace this chance and delay the API freeze as much as > > > possible. > > > > Not really. We definitely welcome change requests done in a timely > manner. My concern is about last minute change requests, such as major AP= I > change requests just a few days before the release when driver > development is complete. Is there a policy in place to prevent against su= ch > events for next-tree type of development? >=20 > No there is no such policy on a next- tree. > It is free to the maintainer of the tree I guess. Thanks, Thomas. Can you please create a next-tree for QoS Traffic Managemen= t with the following details: Maintainer: Cristian Committers: Hemant, Jerin, Cristian