From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 626AEA0597; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:58:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39B7B1D409; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:58:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C5051D37E for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:58:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 507A75C0117; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 08:58:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 21 Apr 2020 08:58:34 -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= h4UiedNY9mytQJ6VYKTNejCO6hhRcJm610JooqFuleI=; b=FveVgBkCxB5OwVB6 8pBxCkkEu3cpJXWEAtpTAIplHZntJn4nzKPPNH6S1PD7fVBBoWj4gcIDtm6740tu s+aeIjrC5X5BQgG42p40ONTkiR3Ty2fmtItXXlxyxT+JHrblaY6XlQHCDT5UZwVM bxADL4Bg77hhFDa05d85q8rz+anMdE3Z5MF8ipirQ9KIXibw90NQ+Woztwagl5in A/TC3LluI9bt5PGFrkYFVO8f+DmedRKROL/oXo5lW5Z5PEpTG1/P1MQhXdZHOBzD 4t1EQBiNxTPYWruosbpecm3ugdod4Zq928a6QXgyggFT2IgjKYeLjNnXH3aPkV6u 9ILkTA== 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=h4UiedNY9mytQJ6VYKTNejCO6hhRcJm610JooqFul eI=; b=cWk2knFPcT6NmMJHCV/2FS44fOSciiqJuL5aEebuSHHKPaVrLE7imeBdh YFSfRXsKN1dyJhg+V3Bhp3JjZo69xLj9SjOVYkI2CTgYCTgD2e6bclnR9x/Tpl/v rbJwD20NjKdj3DRtuXbtxrOhO33fMm0Afzq0PmC+ysohYO2xB76fQxWAvlC6D4MU uN8NhedzQnPF46ZfB4PaioakYjEW2BrP8kDa2SCddo6vLB2zk5dSZ43+3eoRd8Yk O+z/F692LhuOY5a3ufQVnq+WDZnqe8DxFnUbb0NejPbx5m4v2A3vegcb85doBjo4 C0tTtlpQ3iwOs6eUCXenPDg6tXY2g== X-ME-Sender: <xms:-e2eXiS5PbQGJW6U6cysalTiyiXC16ltYAgKpPNJEXy2fMr7qLzzhw> X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrgeehgdehkecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucfkph epjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghr rghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:-e2eXhFHWEIwkK_i5IpsCxK6WNnD3EjvkHKVRxDrLehd6ejQPnBNIQ> <xmx:-e2eXsNHYdGL051T8lIXe_RA8X_4znj_9UbeWDrMYFKrL7XV07QHdQ> <xmx:-e2eXlngcGr937nPQpIi6_BOywS0dhTw8EiYurRM7lqq-FEoFDQ5Kw> <xmx:-u2eXtEy8CwK4Bc-xFV2uJQQ9LoQSlhd9AbDoVsvx5d5KmcpjtlGDw> Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 013F4328005D; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 08:58:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> Cc: "akhil.goyal@nxp.com" <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>, "Dharmappa, Savinay" <savinay.dharmappa@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "david.marchand@redhat.com" <david.marchand@redhat.com>, "Iremonger, Bernard" <bernard.iremonger@intel.com> Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:58:31 +0200 Message-ID: <2046825.NgBsaNRSFp@thomas> In-Reply-To: <BYAPR11MB3301535FECD325B767390C5E9AD50@BYAPR11MB3301.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> References: <20200305071523.30952-1-savinay.dharmappa@intel.com> <1827889.yKVeVyVuyW@thomas> <BYAPR11MB3301535FECD325B767390C5E9AD50@BYAPR11MB3301.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] test/ipsec: measure libipsec performance X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> 21/04/2020 14:04, Ananyev, Konstantin: > > 21/04/2020 13:07, Ananyev, Konstantin: > > > > 21/04/2020 12:21, Ananyev, Konstantin: > > > > > > 21/04/2020 04:29, Thomas Monjalon: > > > > > > > > --- a/MAINTAINERS > > > > > > > > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > > > > > > > > @@ -1259,6 +1259,8 @@ F: lib/librte_ipsec/ > > > > > > > > M: Bernard Iremonger <bernard.iremonger@intel.com> > > > > > > > > F: app/test/test_ipsec.c > > > > > > > > F: doc/guides/prog_guide/ipsec_lib.rst > > > > > > > > +M: Savinay Dharmappa <savinay.dharmappa@intel.com> > > > > > > > > +F: app/test/test_ipsec_perf.c > > > > > > > > M: Vladimir Medvedkin <vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com> > > > > > > > > F: app/test/test_ipsec_sad.c > > > > > > > > F: app/test-sad/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Repeating what I said on v3: > > > > > > > Having one different maintainer per test file is quite ridiculous. > > > > > > > The maintainers of a lib are expected to maintain the related tests. > > > > [...] > > > > > About having separate MAINTAINER for the test - > > > > > honestly I don't understand why it is a problem for you. > > > > > Obviously we would like to spread the load - what's wrong with it? > > > > > > > > This is a problem of ownership. > > > > Maintaining a library means you take care of every aspect, including tests. > > > > That's why I would like to see you as a global maintainer of IPsec. > > > > > > > > It doesn't prevent you to delegate workload, of course. > > > > But at the end it is more convenient to know there is a limited number > > > > of persons responsible for the global quality of a component, > > > > a person which is accountable and answering questions on the topic, > > > > no matter which exact file we are talking about. > > > > > > Just talked with Bernard, he kindly agreed to be a maintainer for all ipsec UT: > > > app/test/test_ipsec* > > > Hope that will fulfil your concern? > > > > My concern was to have the library maintainer maintaining also the related tests. > > I don't understand why you don't want to take this responsibility, > > but I cannot force you. > > Having only one maintainer for IPsec tests is better than the current situation. > > Ok, are you going to drop v4, so we can submit v5 with the fixes? > Or should we submit a patch with fixes on top of v4? v4 is dropped, you can send a v5.