From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>
Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B6D28E6C
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  2 Nov 2015 22:44:57 +0100 (CET)
Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18])
 by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 02 Nov 2015 13:44:56 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,236,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="810016633"
Received: from irsmsx102.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.155])
 by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 02 Nov 2015 13:44:54 -0800
Received: from irsmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.11.138]) by
 IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.98]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002;
 Mon, 2 Nov 2015 21:44:53 +0000
From: "O'Driscoll, Tim" <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>
To: Bagh Fares <Fares.Bagh@freescale.com>, Dave Neary <dneary@redhat.com>,
 "CHIOSI, MARGARET T" <mc3124@att.com>, Stephen Hemminger
 <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] Proposals from project governance meeting at DPDK
 Userspace (was Notes from ...)
Thread-Index: AdETO3UNrTlKQ/IxR1OwaDiPUSWx2gCV4JSAAAA2sAAAABzCgAAAdDuAAABjPoAAAEDSAAAHU5bQ
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 21:44:52 +0000
Message-ID: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA6744CA22@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <BLUPR0301MB16517A68D5DB10053F353753982F0@BLUPR0301MB1651.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <20151102092153.3b005229@xeon-e3>
 <158A97FC7D125A40A52F49EE9C463AF522EE478A@MISOUT7MSGUSRDD.ITServices.sbc.com>
 <56379DE1.9020705@redhat.com>
 <BLUPR0301MB1651C776A4520A49F9659499982C0@BLUPR0301MB1651.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <5637A387.3060507@redhat.com>
 <BLUPR0301MB1651FB584EAF082BFB3739C4982C0@BLUPR0301MB1651.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BLUPR0301MB1651FB584EAF082BFB3739C4982C0@BLUPR0301MB1651.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-IE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.180]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
 "Pradeep Kathail \(pkathail@cisco.com\)" <pkathail@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Proposals from project governance meeting at DPDK
 Userspace (was Notes from ...)
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 21:44:58 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Bagh Fares
> Sent: Monday, November 2, 2015 6:03 PM
> To: Dave Neary; CHIOSI, MARGARET T; Stephen Hemminger
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Pradeep Kathail (pkathail@cisco.com)
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Proposals from project governance meeting at
> DPDK Userspace (was Notes from ...)
>=20
> Yes. Thank you. What we like is to get to a point where we discuss API
> and align on APIs for SOC as Margaret mention. As you know Arm has been
> driving ODP as the API for SOC.
> What we like to do is to drive the APIs under DPDK even for Arm SOC.
> Long term, and based on shrinking silicon geometries, and desire to fill
> fabs, Intel will do more SOCs. I was SOC design manager in Intel :-)
> We like to spare the customers like red hat, Cisco, and ATT the pain of
> supporting multiple APIs and code bases.

That's our goal too, so it's good to hear that we're in agreement on this.

> So we need have a forum/place where this can be worked at .

If you have some ideas, then the best way to get some discussion going is t=
hrough the mailing list. You could post a set of patches for proposed chang=
es, a higher-level RFC outlining your thoughts, or just specific questions/=
issues that you see.

On the TSC that was specifically referenced earlier in this thread, there i=
s a proposal for what we're now calling the Architecture Board at: http://d=
pdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-October/026598.html. As Dave mentioned, we agr=
eed at our recent Userspace event in Dublin that membership of the board sh=
ould be based on contributions and technical standing in the community. The=
 board will review and approve new members on an annual basis.
=20
> We are reaching out and we like to feel welcome and some love :-)

As Thomas already said, new contributors are always welcome!


Tim


>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Neary [mailto:dneary@redhat.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 02, 2015 11:55 AM
> To: Bagh Fares-B25033 <Fares.Bagh@freescale.com>; CHIOSI, MARGARET T
> <mc3124@att.com>; Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; jim.st.leger@intel.com; Pradeep Kathail
> (pkathail@cisco.com) <pkathail@cisco.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Proposals from project governance meeting at
> DPDK Userspace (was Notes from ...)
>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> On the contrary! I am aware that Freescale has been engaged for some
> time in DPDK. I was responding to Margaret's contention that future
> contributors (and she called out ARM and SOC vendors) should have a
> voice.
>=20
> I hope that clarifies my position and meaning.
>=20
> Thanks,
> Dave.
>=20
> On 11/02/2015 12:44 PM, Bagh Fares wrote:
> > As SOC vendor we will contribute heavily to the project. Example
> crypto acceleration. We already contribute a lot to the linux community.
> > So not sure why the doubt about of contribution?
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dave Neary [mailto:dneary@redhat.com]
> > Sent: Monday, November 02, 2015 11:31 AM
> > To: CHIOSI, MARGARET T <mc3124@att.com>; Stephen Hemminger
> > <stephen@networkplumber.org>; Bagh Fares-B25033
> > <Fares.Bagh@freescale.com>
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; jim.st.leger@intel.com; Pradeep Kathail
> > (pkathail@cisco.com) <pkathail@cisco.com>
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Proposals from project governance meeting at
> > DPDK Userspace (was Notes from ...)
> >
> > Hi Margaret,
> >
> > On 11/02/2015 12:28 PM, CHIOSI, MARGARET T wrote:
> >> I think it is very important for the first version of governance that
> we have ARM/SOC vendor/future contributors to be part of TSC.
> >> If based on historical contribution - they will be at a disadvantage.
> >> We need to have the DPDK organization support an API which supports a
> broader set of chips.
> >
> > I think there is definitely a role for SOC vendors in the project
> governance, but the TSC should be representative of the technical
> contributors to the project, rather than an aspirational body aiming to
> get more people involved.
> >
> > I think there is an opportunity for future contributors/users to form
> a powerful constituency in the project, but the TSC is not the right
> place for that to happen IMHO.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dave.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:stephen@networkplumber.org]
> >> Sent: Monday, November 02, 2015 12:22 PM
> >> To: Bagh Fares
> >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; dneary@redhat.com; jim.st.leger@intel.com; Pradeep
> >> Kathail (pkathail@cisco.com); CHIOSI, MARGARET T
> >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Proposals from project governance meeting at
> >> DPDK Userspace (was Notes from ...)
> >>
> >> There were two outcomes.
> >>
> >> One was a proposal to move governance under Linux Foundation.
> >>
> >> The other was to have a technical steering committee.
> >> It was agreed the TSC would be based on the contributors to the
> >> project, although we didn't come to a conclusion on a voting model.
> >>
> >>
> >> I would propose that TSC should be elected at regular user summit
> >> from nominees; in a manner similar to LF Technical Advisory Board.
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy Open Source and Standards, Red
> > Hat - http://community.redhat.com
> > Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338
> >
>=20
> --
> Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy
> Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
> Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338