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 1B5A341BE9; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 10:03:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A311842BD9; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 10:03:20 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D61C140FAE for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 10:03:18 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1675674198; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=HNwERQyMtekbyXiAiSnmt6i05E6n2Zj/DAIE4HLjkKE=; b=FHgpieE6U+s6Nk36HievyrqGwvqALNCEAW8wL3/dXmpaNHPNl+CZ0aw6Bbr1nIp7n4otDk NRTIMbQD7DzkKjgTHQDe0Nv+SBmGAmQO/W6LHVcdmLTlaYO0lM09f1t5c+ATpTnyq9N6KK wk/3X2hXUjFsV9l42/WVp+PDK6N2auQ= Received: from mail-wm1-f69.google.com (mail-wm1-f69.google.com [209.85.128.69]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id us-mta-378-g3-9FxXxMHCx5MVICdrvlQ-1; Mon, 06 Feb 2023 04:03:14 -0500 X-MC-Unique: g3-9FxXxMHCx5MVICdrvlQ-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f69.google.com with SMTP id s11-20020a05600c384b00b003dffc7343c3so1168127wmr.0 for ; Mon, 06 Feb 2023 01:03:14 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:references:from:subject:cc:to:message-id:date :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=HNwERQyMtekbyXiAiSnmt6i05E6n2Zj/DAIE4HLjkKE=; b=Eq8PydXAXa7vGTpdYH3IrOPkpRb3LtnkGAOsed2KhoO2bxbr6LxntjtaOi1XD0L6QK 3MKNjzAjcgjc/BlXreIAJTw13DcOw2F+vWXePHj42BaTyEolXlIEGf4Jl3oQqJ7JHL6m YOXCj4J40fAU7Wv/j/NnyoW/F8BXBnYeuOE5G2vd/4viXFthS1ogJK6UQIV4aDvnVckc ZTpHIUnhIMcmepxV3rRbn8nIl68M1iSik+HEvtbJ2QDsq0IfJmhqCgwue7Bi5PqoJ+6E kXaUICPk6mFsDoS2aCYRlpOdrSuYpi0c/YA0uCz9Sg4aUHC89E6wF2sLg3lDC6XUmyC4 lDew== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKVagETRWURcVDOFyTrR5YHMlgTwD8sq+lz2y5JgGt/HIa4J5gts Rmt6lV/ZV+jS9nfKHYJmk6zA0KtsbUMDPY0VBWKjONMDVTOoDHwdI2ScSeKnxfmi+y/Mcf1MbY+ E6/s= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:514d:0:b0:2bb:f88b:43b6 with SMTP id u13-20020a5d514d000000b002bbf88b43b6mr19170986wrt.3.1675674193612; Mon, 06 Feb 2023 01:03:13 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set8KNBCh7E7x7TrWvBxF2Btn+QnK2OCqZh+FsXCRONM1ybyxbdhQv2U1kffvPIdI+9BR9NkVKw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:514d:0:b0:2bb:f88b:43b6 with SMTP id u13-20020a5d514d000000b002bbf88b43b6mr19170978wrt.3.1675674193462; Mon, 06 Feb 2023 01:03:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (2a01cb000f483e0055ae3800781b5cbc.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr. [2a01:cb00:f48:3e00:55ae:3800:781b:5cbc]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e23-20020a5d5957000000b002366e3f1497sm8345802wri.6.2023.02.06.01.03.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 06 Feb 2023 01:03:13 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2023 10:03:12 +0100 Message-Id: To: "David Marchand" , =?utf-8?q?Morten_Br=C3=B8rup?= , "Kevin Laatz" Cc: , "Chengwen Feng" Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/5] eal: report applications lcore usage From: "Robin Jarry" X-Mailer: aerc/0.14.0-60-gc1f7df1a0e5f-dirty References: <20221123102612.1688865-1-rjarry@redhat.com> <20230202134329.539625-1-rjarry@redhat.com> <20230202134329.539625-3-rjarry@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 1 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=Flowed 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 David Marchand, Feb 06, 2023 at 09:48: > > +struct rte_lcore_usage { > > + /** The total amount of time since application start, in TSC cy= cles. */ > > + uint64_t total_cycles; > > This code comment needs some clarification. > > What is this "total amount of time"? > "application start" is ambiguous. > EAL lcore threads are not created/started by the application itself, > so the application has no idea of the time the lcore/threads were > created. > > I would describe as: > /** The total amount of time that the application has been running on > this lcore, in TSC cycles. */ > > Is it acceptable to you? Yes, this leaves less room for interpretation. > > + /** The amount of busy time since application start, in TSC cyc= les. */ > > + uint64_t busy_cycles; > > And here: > /** The amount of time the application was busy, handling some > workload on this lcore, in TSC cycles. */ This is in line with the total. Looks good to me. I will address that and your other comments for v9.