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 7EDE446905; Mon, 8 Sep 2025 15:28:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 127BC40156; Mon, 8 Sep 2025 15:28:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pg1-f174.google.com (mail-pg1-f174.google.com [209.85.215.174]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AC9840156 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2025 15:28:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pg1-f174.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-b4c53892a56so3937091a12.2 for ; Mon, 08 Sep 2025 06:28:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; t=1757338085; x=1757942885; darn=dpdk.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+17T9wDTG4tWQNt3S6oTVg9lvDlOSmIy6aiPHwahHlM=; b=Ekec/N3n8wbtbi73x6Tl/DwECAYx2Swaa2XgBoLyKpIM+h0Dg3rBg+/ofypQJ6s3EX 1xL/cSgGzjeoqcaK9rBSMBgRIfPsRc+M08saEe6EehD0w8D6BrSKM7dw5LrOCjmHNMn8 3Gm24WPRz5gfftn5vhLfpetaPoRSEW0V3EkPg= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1757338085; x=1757942885; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=+17T9wDTG4tWQNt3S6oTVg9lvDlOSmIy6aiPHwahHlM=; b=WGV2EGB0fbSLUIMcWSba+NZlb4zLnOkJIFJIIJFutyuCbRt3TTHUA2jaqUroQN3E5j QB2fMu0NEJYPEqgNGyomXsozwNSzyA7g3998VHh9Yjr3ZpifSF6K4u7+oox7mumY1GYf 0ivgTJfPOBdY7gh3FrpKyhRfPfK4f78dmYypNF1d1BoIIa3bDLv9+Qpm0DZTGJSole8l 8t6SyGmqpHHJuZGl2dYKWzMIgZyAYCMAzGxue+jmqkwT0xj1fOq0lA61bF8xdxlkO3Uh tccVZaGAUVJ8fG7ltptoEkMkBSu/W26aey9dN46SfuPL2+VzI+yoDs38D0QxnacO5PM5 Omig== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxXen2NdUTnJHfpMxsl/ecOE3pE9sbrX8FyaIGVGWfDCuwIgal9 bTabQGUV2f4vfRztCwg83SaJYAz5KnkE/rkKmMYvdkWIbYtl/2tbdy/PR0gmNTDGNfslvwBmLvE RQE+LZsl7fOXjqp72vkz/8ta11GBhXGrnnxBt/xHa4A== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsbKyU1z+pFoA6B+tdqk8zGRW1uixWxykOcExwmEu+DrBZ/peXsyNG120FKOVG db3o+pzgZgTD8+Hts/8/+08EmdnZnKXYR5tJWTJsL8ZJvN4tqRqzv/w1bt+Zf4t1TjuV3SA6rzX Ksgtzn/0EBDmZbPPGHZPHpG3SfbPs9KEXWx4pY/9mglcuIGa5OjvI+OimoXoVJRw/MwuaD0D2gh 1pO3Ufjxs872dzz9wx9U9SSbbE8VtYV2OmNfHI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHdXv6bJPZXd8htYomREP3M7UcBMInmz/mIJFiuDJSmQacLbEqWQBdvWMOQIWS/xMrSvwiHqPt6oO7ZKAxZyFY= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:db0a:b0:24e:49ea:1c6b with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-251751e5cbdmr120420405ad.46.1757338085293; Mon, 08 Sep 2025 06:28:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20250908014154.82938-1-probb@iol.unh.edu> <77838cba-0bf4-4764-8094-664265162081@arm.com> In-Reply-To: <77838cba-0bf4-4764-8094-664265162081@arm.com> From: Patrick Robb Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2025 09:21:12 -0400 X-Gm-Features: Ac12FXxNlhs12b6TN6dHTXx9axt7ERKIh2qSIr_MxhTagbcEevKjeeqaIP3Tuto Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] dts: add dpdk shell warm up period To: Luca Vizzarro Cc: dev@dpdk.org, dmarx@iol.unh.edu, abailey@iol.unh.edu Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000531a1c063e4a2828" 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 --000000000000531a1c063e4a2828 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 6:03=E2=80=AFAM Luca Vizzarro wrote: > Hi Patrick, > > Perfectly understand the situation, I am just afraid that adding a whole > 5 seconds every time an InteractiveShell is spawned may slow down > everything by a lot. These are spawned a lot of times, so it will stack > up. Is there no other way to test for readiness? > Yeah. I was guessing at the math before and thought it was like +25% execution time, but now I see it's more like +90%. Definitely not ideal. I wasn't able to come up with any other readiness checks but maybe there is. Anyhow let's discuss all this at the Thursday meeting as it's not urgent. > > Also I think we are providing the ability to run shells outside the > context manager as well for some scenarios where it's needed, so this > approach won't cover that case unfortunately. > Good point I'll take another look. > > Best, > Luca > --000000000000531a1c063e4a2828 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Mon, Sep 8, = 2025 at 6:03=E2=80=AFAM Luca Vizzarro <Luca.Vizzarro@arm.com> wrote:
Hi Patrick,

Perfectly understand the situation, I am just afraid that adding a whole 5 seconds every time an InteractiveShell is spawned may slow down
everything by a lot. These are spawned a lot of times, so it will stack up. Is there no other way to test for readiness?

<= /div>
Yeah. I was guessing at the math before and thought it was like= =C2=A0+25% execution time, but now I see it's more like=C2=A0+90%. Defi= nitely not ideal.

I wasn't able to come up wit= h any other readiness checks but maybe there is. Anyhow let's discuss a= ll this at the Thursday meeting as it's not urgent.
=C2=A0

Also I think we are providing the ability to run shells outside the
context manager as well for some scenarios where it's needed, so this <= br> approach won't cover that case unfortunately.

=
Good point I'll take another look.
=C2=A0

Best,
Luca
--000000000000531a1c063e4a2828--