From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E33EE5F0F for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2019 15:51:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89E202216B; Mon, 18 Feb 2019 09:51:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 18 Feb 2019 09:51:52 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=W0gNZJrHrf6Bi33XgcDfULvkaISBNzl5nrCbEKN/QmU=; b=GWsyqdDkS2C3 dNrSk+KMFE2Fcx+lCtCwlMlxqxNEc2SoquOT8542gfv2GVbHHm1UfoveoJvIInKq qxq0LbH2gaAn4JsZqy8mzbN/2W1eDwn4XKIkVrURWNa/tMnC20DPKIOGAPPs8fcf tDedEPTrQZ/XPIC3ugIv5Ff+LQoAscY= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=W0gNZJrHrf6Bi33XgcDfULvkaISBNzl5nrCbEKN/Q mU=; b=6YMyFRPrRuItuCTGrGndw67rjUMF+2REpz92/77Wq4SMvBTGjebAjAHlK sUBo42x5+zmSbHNFD8eNP++mgUbXDsEc2JzbhVtNrlc/T9pIdbrIknhuDpzgqMGG 5PAmes1+DD3B2zw/hW7qQ+V5fjx5m6YQ/TCIBlkbUeLa1sOsFXfnByY/M9cATj5j JQm4GfM/bi3KrdQ19jQ2s2DhcRG28NghjJSaNH9hG0Pu/GRGM/5diaOJjmoweh8z 9p/fm4lOMMvToCSgeLcaaY762P8Q6mZEztQxfdDElOCEy+7rmlGmUVWBzWrO+3o5 4vkibDN/dzRauSQR3elpb5A+8VjfA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedutddrtddugdefkeculddtuddrgedtledrtddtmd cutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfhuthen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpeguphgukhdrohhrghenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecu rfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtne cuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 124291030F; Mon, 18 Feb 2019 09:51:50 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Mcnamara, John" Cc: "Kovacevic, Marko" , "web@dpdk.org" , "O'Driscoll, Tim" Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 15:51:48 +0100 Message-ID: <20953894.L8HUZOpLqN@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20190215164337.38535-1-marko.kovacevic@intel.com> <2073329.GrbqgB35EI@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-web] [PATCH] update Intel roadmap for 19.05 X-BeenThere: web@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK website maintenance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 14:51:53 -0000 18/02/2019 13:30, Mcnamara, John: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2019 9:06 PM > > To: Kovacevic, Marko > > Cc: web@dpdk.org; Mcnamara, John ; O'Driscoll, > > Tim > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] update Intel roadmap for 19.05 > > > > 15/02/2019 17:43, Marko Kovacevic: > > > Intel roadmap is announced in the dpdk-dev mailing list: > > > http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2019-February/124766.html > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Marko Kovacevic > > > --- > > > +- QAT asymmetric crypto with support for modexp and modinv > > > +- QAT compression PMD support for large scatter-gather lists > > > +- add a DPDK PMD to support AF_XDP > > > +- support for additional crypto/auth algorithms in the ipsec library > > > +- initial support for DPDK on Windows > > > +- add new baseband device turbo PMD > > > > I changed the order to sort it like in the release notes, and did few > > small rewords, hence > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon > > > > and applied: http://core.dpdk.org/roadmap/ > > > > I'm surprised you did not mention > > virtio optimisations and non-blocking stack mempool handler. > > Is there any specific reason? > > Hi, > > I left out the virtio optimization because I wasn't sure if they were large enough to mention. > > I left of the non-blocking stack mempool handler because it is being submitted by a different (Intel) team but I probably should have included it. Feel free to update anything you think required.