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 EA7A641BEB; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 12:46:20 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AA9640FAE; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 12:46:20 +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 11BE140A7A for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 12:46:17 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1675683977; 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=pATBieBEkeg+b8t4MZpohlee55gAkZP3k+1KhLf/Jjw=; b=AMi+uP0ZNWqiRlnt406GHSF5uUQZN28AeOBaPP9bztgzkT59smCUZ42QUstuON226AJNTt O1KoXGZ7YHNo3Mu3gmLK14doW8I9UYQYZPCvTpZCLXOeheHCWNhZlzng/T9ihvwrStqG62 IUYdzIuRKtD/Gplh+Ru/wvxIlyjhCOY= Received: from mail-wm1-f72.google.com (mail-wm1-f72.google.com [209.85.128.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id us-mta-610-VoCoivjUPHe0M84paS_mDw-1; Mon, 06 Feb 2023 06:46:16 -0500 X-MC-Unique: VoCoivjUPHe0M84paS_mDw-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f72.google.com with SMTP id o31-20020a05600c511f00b003dc53da325dso8811387wms.8 for ; Mon, 06 Feb 2023 03:46:16 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:references:to:from:subject:cc:message-id:date :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=pATBieBEkeg+b8t4MZpohlee55gAkZP3k+1KhLf/Jjw=; b=UzB4ZssyUhNfHcKRlgUF/E/poD1/XeTMcVsx4BKEm8TN7qhYG84jt1M0F1RvYF8WeG SjogxdCQ1v4Re6eQk+7bN/H3s1l3BBbDGWzjTK7ktInVAf5g0rAijnClZc49CoZ2neA9 Xjm//Lqup6FH+k6/1JQ7WKreF/gY1EwrxSQa79cgXrbRMb/I7+uXUVvuDKqT5PoebCF9 n7/xd8J1ksrymElKepOpjPqhYaNNpsP+xdIULWgb6lK71ravNv0MuNCowo1bQRn4e524 Zlxkq/D9D2kUfuxx1HVoyllRPW4huSodMebSsPHx49nOsu3O4pO54gDN6a3xyE5JPfjc ID7g== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXdXTPFzOMwfqWiuT0meU5kcx0hGGCKJTHAEEAlKU40TpUrO5uC xYTdhgI/tYih8NdCT72EfMGHyz6Vv4IZfXiEW7xHn7qEgie9lRKJeWCzDLY5+8tJ6uHH9B7CjvE qOnk= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:f603:0:b0:3df:dea7:8ec with SMTP id w3-20020a1cf603000000b003dfdea708ecmr14754405wmc.20.1675683975406; Mon, 06 Feb 2023 03:46:15 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set8iJtQE/QHLf3EKHfXgh6er/izKrzhxMNiX4Y8UTLzZJdL+CCW3F1F0d39okGhJ+/jmZ3M4PQ== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:f603:0:b0:3df:dea7:8ec with SMTP id w3-20020a1cf603000000b003dfdea708ecmr14754392wmc.20.1675683975215; Mon, 06 Feb 2023 03:46:15 -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 h16-20020a05600c351000b003dc521f336esm11274073wmq.14.2023.02.06.03.46.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 06 Feb 2023 03:46:14 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2023 12:46:14 +0100 Message-Id: Cc: =?utf-8?q?Morten_Br=C3=B8rup?= , "Kevin Laatz" Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/5] eal: add lcore info in telemetry From: "Robin Jarry" To: "fengchengwen" , X-Mailer: aerc/0.14.0-60-gc1f7df1a0e5f-dirty References: <20221123102612.1688865-1-rjarry@redhat.com> <20230202134329.539625-1-rjarry@redhat.com> <20230202134329.539625-2-rjarry@redhat.com> <72396994-5403-99f9-20a8-9c785dfb2b89@huawei.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 fengchengwen, Feb 06, 2023 at 12:22: > Just invoke callback on one specific lcore. > > In this patch, the lcore_telemetry_info_cb() only valid on specific=20 > lcore, but it was implements by rte_lcore_iterate which will iterate=20 > all lcores. Ok I see. I don't think this would be worth the effort. There will never=20 be more than a few hundred cores. The performance gain would be=20 negligible. What do you think?