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 C5946A04B8; Tue, 5 May 2020 13:05:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 394B91D580; Tue, 5 May 2020 13:05:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CF741D531 for ; Tue, 5 May 2020 13:05:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 943605C00CF; Tue, 5 May 2020 07:05:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 05 May 2020 07:05:47 -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= HyhW1Afee35ZsZsZZajNcPa1ZjbVeCH5AmOHI4naL6w=; b=hjvQYxSqD29PUfbz TZQ6nIuFqtbPqVZl+Yjw9UYriRNYAgvYfLjX4XfRT5gBvHzFtB3ROKqRgStxc2RU swTo1addY6rSvjBnQxZWpDBFvcb6m5oxmD7a7tjYwTsKRVITYDQGUcd6AEIwCemO SHotTjPuQVHUJMWHzhVJbLvsKUtfZ0gQ77UZ0UOa6MRJuaCRbRuzpHgCoJBtJSK7 dCnCXYLGsloLCgqSJYoxxdvlJOVT1G16ykOwtf1EnU2AHOpsdaRCtYFRB9nHZiwJ CuYbEefNJCYVem4bQMlvfthIRkKy596nYHiWtXPFA0mBeH8UBZEt7c9V1lVuJhW5 AlwODw== 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=HyhW1Afee35ZsZsZZajNcPa1ZjbVeCH5AmOHI4naL 6w=; b=PkgeVN++e+9szTSzFLZlDb50pg/Sr7RShiIbUnbW5ejjbnLX+nxkdI+1E ZVGTzUPZ4gfj8k8ggJaiN3Ym9bDCG5WmXwUmGulnKujtMPRZYG0wVZhLH7v5XoYQ 8CXBeF5Fj0nlGZVn550vV054dVN8Owfl6E/1MK0VDtSQme6+LPbnQEQG1e68zf7o xjNmHzAHIKVFD/KYm4obX3pkL3kYEXmCfP9QXniujUy2zzLW0+lvTRr0VfN0EfAk 0x4CYZsMK6bbGgT3s8n9TbkF1/dzh6Ppkqqrg8LmSFZbhaNV0ltp6x0FP6K+I7l0 ZR0MJxAUAeF2JzivzXnfVOsUxoaLw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrjeeigdefgecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucggtf frrghtthgvrhhnpeffvdffjeeuteelfeeileduudeugfetjeelveefkeejfeeigeehteff vdekfeegudenucffohhmrghinhepughpughkrdhorhhgnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvd dtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhr ohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght 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 6C4743066014; Tue, 5 May 2020 07:05:46 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Wisam Monther Cc: Andrew Rybchenko , "dev@dpdk.org" , Jack Min , "jerinjacobk@gmail.com" , "gerlitz.or@gmail.com" , "l.yan@epfl.ch" Date: Tue, 05 May 2020 13:05:45 +0200 Message-ID: <3038759.oiGErgHkdL@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20200430093249.6772-2-wisamm@mellanox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/5] app/test-flow-perf: add flow performance skeleton 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" 05/05/2020 12:45, Wisam Monther: > From: Andrew Rybchenko > > On 4/30/20 1:33 PM, Wisam Jaddo wrote: > >> --- a/MAINTAINERS > >> +++ b/MAINTAINERS > >> @@ -1504,6 +1504,11 @@ T: git://dpdk.org/next/dpdk-next-net > >> F: app/test-pmd/ > >> F: doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/ > >> > >> +Flow performance tool > >> +M: Wisam Jaddo > >> +F: app/test-flow-perf > >> +F: doc/guides/flow-perf.rst > >> + > > > >Shouldn't it be alphabetially sorted? I think by app name. > > It looks no, > Current order: > - Sample_packet_forward > - test-pmd > - comp_perf > - eventdev > - proc-info > > So I'll move the new app to be in the end of the test apps, since it's been added last, is this ok? If no alphabetical sorting, there should be a logical one. Having rte_flow perf testing after general ethdev testing (testpmd), like you did, is good in my opinion.