From: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
To: Ciara Power <ciara.power@intel.com>,
Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: dev <dev@dpdk.org>, Emma Foley <efoley@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/6] replace telemetry with process_info
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 16:21:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJFAV8wf=DzWt8fmTiC2J3ateRwq1QiuXpOujWJUOQc0V6zk_Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191205173128.64543-1-ciara.power@intel.com>
Hello Ciara, Bruce,
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 6:34 PM Ciara Power <ciara.power@intel.com> wrote:
>
> From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
>
> This patchset proposes a new library, called "process-info" for now, to
> replace the existing telemetry library in DPDK. (Name subject to change
> if someone can propose a better one).
>
> The existing telemetry library provides useful capabilities if used:
> - Creates a unix socket on the system to allow external programs
> connect and gather stats about the DPDK process.
> - Supports outputting the xstats for various network cards on the
> system.
> - Can be used to output any other information exported to the metrics
> library, e.g. by applications.
> - Uses JSON message format, which is widely supported by other
> languages and systems.
> - Is supported by a plugin to collectd.
>
> However, the library also has some issues and limitations that could be
> improved upon:
> - Has a dependency on libjansson for JSON processing, so is disabled
> by default.
> - Tied entirely to the metrics library for statistics.
> - No support for sending non-stats data, e.g. something as simple as
> DPDK version string.
> - All data gathering functions are in the library itself, which also
> means…
> - No support for libraries or drivers to present their own
> information via the library.
>
> We therefore propose to keep the good points of the existing library,
> but change the way things work to rectify the downsides.
> This leads to the following design choices in the library:
> - Keep the existing idea of using a unix socket for connection (just
> simplifying the connection handling).
> - We would like to use JSON format, where possible, but the jansson
> library dependency is problematic. However, creating JSON-encoded
> data is easier than trying to parse JSON in C code, so we can keep
> the JSON output format for processing by e.g. collectd and other
> tools, while simplifying the input to be plain text commands:
> - Commands in this RFC are designed to all start with "/" for
> consistency
> - Any parameters to the commands, e.g. the specific port to get
> stats for, are placed after a comma ","
> - Have the library only handle socket creation and input handling.
> All data gathering should be provided by functions external to the
> library registered by other components, e.g. have ethdev library
> provide the function to query NIC xstats, etc.
> - Have the library directly initialized by EAL by default, so that
> unless an app explicitly does not want the support, monitoring is
> available on all DPDK apps.
>
> The obvious question that remains to be answered here is: "why a new
> library rather than just fixing the old one?"
>
> The answer is that we have conflicts between the final two design
> choices above, which require that the library be built early in the
> build as other libraries will call into it to register callbacks, and
> the desire to keep backward compatibility e.g. for use with collectd
> plugin, which requires the existing library code be kept around and
> built - as it is now - at the end of the build process since it calls
> into other DPDK libraries. We therefore cannot have one library that
> meets both requirements, hence the replacement which allows us to
> maintain backward compatibility by just leaving the old lib in place
> until e.g. 20.11.
>
> This is also why the new library is called "process_info", since the
> name "telemetry" is already taken. Suggestions for a better name
> welcome.
The only user of the rte_telemetry api I could find is the (not yet
merged [1]) dpdk collectd plugin.
How will this impact it?
Can we expect compatibility?
1: https://github.com/collectd/collectd/pull/3273
--
David Marchand
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-05 15:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-05 17:31 Ciara Power
2019-12-05 17:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 1/6] process-info: introduce process-info library Ciara Power
2019-12-05 17:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 2/6] eal: integrate " Ciara Power
2019-12-05 17:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 3/6] usertools: add process-info python script Ciara Power
2019-12-05 17:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 4/6] ethdev: add callback support for process-info Ciara Power
2019-12-05 17:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 5/6] rawdev: " Ciara Power
2019-12-05 17:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 6/6] examples/l3fwd-power: enable use of process-info Ciara Power
2020-02-05 15:21 ` David Marchand [this message]
2020-02-05 17:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/6] replace telemetry with process_info Bruce Richardson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAJFAV8wf=DzWt8fmTiC2J3ateRwq1QiuXpOujWJUOQc0V6zk_Q@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=ciara.power@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=efoley@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).