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 C5F962BAA for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 08:09:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Feb 2017 23:09:15 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.35,197,1484035200"; d="scan'208";a="827518119" Received: from unknown (HELO [163.33.230.29]) ([163.33.230.29]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2017 23:09:14 -0800 To: Thomas Monjalon References: <1486118019-2280-1-git-send-email-remy.horton@intel.com> <2924793.QDCoddA1K3@xps13> Cc: dev@dpdk.org From: Remy Horton Organization: Intel Shannon Limited Message-ID: Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 07:09:13 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2924793.QDCoddA1K3@xps13> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 0/7] Expanded statistics reporting 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, 23 Feb 2017 07:09:17 -0000 On 16/02/2017 10:53, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2017-02-03 10:33, Remy Horton: [..] > I think there are three remaining questions: > - When the metrics computation are done? (in which thread?) Actual calculation is not done by libmetrics itself - it only handles distribution. Calculation is done prior to the calculated values being passed to rte_metrics_update_value*(), so the thread that does the calculation is a decision for the application. > - May the few lines of computation code be done differently when tightly > integrated in an application logic? Yes, since it is the application itself (or in the case of bit-rate, a separate library) that does the calculation. > - Could it be hosted in a separate repository on dpdk.org? > That's part of a broader discussion on how DPDK is packaged.