From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDFF4A0543; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 22:20:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C297D8F96; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 22:20:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from new4-smtp.messagingengine.com (new4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.230]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9009E2C57; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 22:20:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFB75583ABE; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 16:20:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 15 Jul 2020 16:20:57 -0400 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=fm1; bh= rswBPY4m2b1/VxMw8rrklwonU2zSGbbi3K9V2kPfpHQ=; b=txWg3bA+qZkeSenB HvOxULU3/71voTwbz3b9kC0uk8AWhdpjg1uviFOZcWosnqL57T99Ok8apcb7Gp9T pnjgiL41tBNmIhCKu7RgCqSCk98fkXIVTioiTcncACD8PFgxPUy0+tUx6X1ectgr PygwHWOi2iTHLDpjmKdfdWmh13OEWOvUJsDTGHueS36batP3AI30cH3+rvkXmNHb kxjoXl2wu4+pPHtUSlZmvI+a6XuAglnqr5AKCtiPL5fWgnmo+ZdVoIaE5PTSgt14 mnE2SvmkxOeBMpLaMl9NQvEyg3FcLG6FIpnQOtI3dp5clgnBkeWWyHhOLxP7uTjE ZI4+Ig== 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=fm3; bh=rswBPY4m2b1/VxMw8rrklwonU2zSGbbi3K9V2kPfp HQ=; b=aHmXW/JNtIVxq9Zgc7YH2N55ITcsPFA/Vx9hAf/0vcAWRY6xRTNXQInwH TZ9z/4SleU1oTuHu3GQ0a3VK5XpnQKdTH5AyOkp7QOwWDOOtXPe7mOmhEJ4LF80/ mo363d3klhwksbgKgdGGrdBxxy6AaEN+RcTZ5nipGU6hmJbbXxnwu8BFL4wdX9xP xyKpqkqXn+cVUWgdUpaz30EVBZYC3Ubdsx3vKX2FdqkuGCW3BgXAQhTcsUHu9tWI oGoJSnKr706Sky5mHf8Y2ZmKyOyIwc+zM5Ep5v+qMi7n9JEm3tjuRUp4s7VyIqG2 Pv6XycDigDfdf80pl+meJiQ2zLyVA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrfedvgdduheegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudeggfdvfeduffdtfeeglefghfeukefgfffhueejtdetuedtjeeu ieeivdffgeehnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghruf hiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghl ohhnrdhnvght 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 C056C3280060; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 16:20:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Arek Kusztal , Akhil Goyal Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "fiona.trahe@intel.com" , "techboard@dpdk.org" , Anoob Joseph , "Somalapuram, Amaranath" , Ankur Dwivedi , "ruifeng.wang@arm.com" , "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" , Nagadheeraj Rottela Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 22:20:54 +0200 Message-ID: <1741506.OIoGGINOQb@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20200715155043.12476-1-arkadiuszx.kusztal@intel.com> <6538553.9OgRhud1Dp@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/5] app: add multi process crypto application 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 15/07/2020 22:15, Akhil Goyal: > > > I see this application as a useful tool to test the readiness of a driver to be > > used > > > in a multi process environment. If app is not a correct place to host it, should it > > be > > > added in examples/multi_process/. I also suggested that in v2 but it makes > > more > > > sense in app as it is a unit test application which does not have any relevance > > as > > > standalone application as crypto may not be used standalone without ethernet > > > for multi process scenario. > > > My first preference was to modify l2fwd-crypto to be used as a multi process > > proof > > > Application but it also make sense to have a unit test application to verify > > standalone > > > crypto PMDs. > > > Open for comments from other crypto PMD owners. > > > > I agree it looks like unit tests. > > Can it be added to app/test/test_cryptodev* ? > > > > Running two instances of test application will be a challenge I guess. > If it can be done, I think all the cases covered in test app other than crypto would > be affected/tested. Right > Test-crypto-perf can be a better option but it may defeat the purpose of test-crypto-perf. > Best would be to make l2fwd-crypto compliant with multi process. Yes, probably a good idea. > But still I am ok to have a unit test application.