From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FD51918F for ; Sat, 5 Dec 2015 18:53:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 05 Dec 2015 09:53:07 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,385,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="834993879" Received: from irsmsx107.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.99]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 05 Dec 2015 09:53:07 -0800 Received: from irsmsx106.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.8.228]) by IRSMSX107.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.10.132]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Sat, 5 Dec 2015 17:53:05 +0000 From: "Glynn, Michael J" To: Thomas Monjalon , Stephen Hemminger , "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 0/4] examples: add performance-thread Thread-Index: AQHRLn9oBHdtrrrCxEOMJAR/yarIuJ67H02AgAAIVICAASY/AIAAXAIQ Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 17:53:04 +0000 Message-ID: <6A5E04BECFB4144EAFCF9EAE3B739A5355917E56@IRSMSX106.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1449159683-7092-3-git-send-email-ian.betts@intel.com> <1449225265-14480-1-git-send-email-ian.betts@intel.com> <20151204100359.6b966aea@xeon-e3> <1850494.rdblc2vbpm@xps13> <877C1F8553E92F43898365570816082F35C0BDF7@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <877C1F8553E92F43898365570816082F35C0BDF7@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-IE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-inteldataclassification: CTP_PUBLIC x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsIiwiaWQiOiI1ODcwMWU5Yi05MjU4LTRmNTQtOTEzYS1hMTE4NDcxN2E1MDkiLCJwcm9wcyI6W3sibiI6IkludGVsRGF0YUNsYXNzaWZpY2F0aW9uIiwidmFscyI6W3sidmFsdWUiOiJDVFBfUFVCTElDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE1LjQuMTAuMTkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoiXC9DTWI5TVVScUlEcjUzNTZIdnUzdnRzeEtGWmNCUWVRb3Vxc1h2SUtySkk9In0= x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.181] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "Betts, Ian" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 0/4] examples: add performance-thread X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2015 17:53:09 -0000 -----Original Message----- From: Betts, Ian=20 Sent: Saturday, December 5, 2015 12:07 PM To: Thomas Monjalon; Stephen Hemminger Cc: dev@dpdk.org; O'Driscoll, Tim; Richardson, Bruce; Glynn, Michael J Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 0/4] examples: add performance-thread -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] Sent: Friday, December 4, 2015 6:34 PM To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Betts, Ian Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 0/4] examples: add performance-thread > Intel may have some milestone to get it into DPDK 2.2 but really this=20 > seems too late... >>>Yes, sure it is too late to have enough discussions in 2.2 timeframe >Just to understand what we mean by too late... >The original RFC was issued on 2nd September. >Thus there have been some three months available for discussion, and for p= eople to raise any questions or concerns. >The first patch was available on 30th September, and a number of subsequen= t patch versions have been issued, meaning the code has been available for = review for two month >As mentioned in the reply to Stephen, there has been no adverse feedback d= uring this period. >/Ian Hi Thomas/Stephen I agree with Ian, how much time is expected for a discussion to happen?=20 As Ian stated, the feature was stated in our 2.2 planned feature list, we c= reated a RFC over 3 months ago, and there's been code available for review = for over 2 months now! (not to mention several version updates, docs, etc.)= .=20 Given this, I believe that there has been ample time for the community to r= eview and provide feedback rather than waiting until the eve of RC3 and the= n requesting more time.=20 In addition, by making it a sample application first people can test it, se= e if it's useful, and further enhance it. Based on usefulness and feedback,= we can then decide whether to make it a DPDK library in a future release, = make it a separate library somewhere else, or do nothing further on it For these reasons, I believe it should be merged into RC3 Regards Mike