From: "Van Haaren, Harry" <harry.van.haaren@intel.com>
To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>,
"Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
"Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFCv2] service core concept
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 10:25:57 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E923DB57A917B54B9182A2E928D00FA640C143CF@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FB0525F@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> Sent: Saturday, June 3, 2017 11:23 AM
> To: Van Haaren, Harry <harry.van.haaren@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>;
> Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Wiles, Keith <keith.wiles@intel.com>
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [RFCv2] service core concept
<snip>
> > In particular this version of the API enables applications that are not aware of services to
> > benefit from the services concept, as EAL args can be used to setup services and service
> cores.
> > With this design, switching to/from SW/HW PMD is transparent to the application. An example
> > use-case is the Eventdev HW PMD to Eventdev SW PMD that requires a service core.
> >
> > I have noted the implementation comments that were raised on the v1. For v2, I think our
> time
> > is better spent looking at the API design, and I will handle implementation feedback in the
> > follow-up patchset to v2 RFC.
> >
> > Below a summary of what we are trying to achieve, and the current API design.
> > Have a good weekend! Cheers, -Harry
>
>
> Looks good to me in general.
> The only comment I have - do we really need to put it into rte_eal_init()
> and a new EAL command-line parameter for it?
> Might be better to leave it to the particular app to decide.
There are a number of options here, each with its own merit:
A) Services/cores config in EAL
Benefit is that service functionality can be transparent to the application. Negative is that the complexity is in EAL.
B) Application configures services/cores
Benefit is no added EAL complexity. Negative is that application code has to configure cores (duplicated per application).
To answer this question, I think we need to estimate how many applications would benefit from EAL integration and balance that against the "complexity cost" of doing so. I do like the simplicity of option (B), however if there is significant value in total transparency to the application I think (A) is the better choice.
Input on A) or B) welcomed! -Harry
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-06 10:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-02 16:09 Van Haaren, Harry
2017-06-03 10:22 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-06-06 10:25 ` Van Haaren, Harry [this message]
2017-06-06 10:56 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-06-06 14:53 ` Bruce Richardson
2017-06-06 15:29 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-06-06 15:40 ` Van Haaren, Harry
2017-06-07 9:50 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-06-07 10:29 ` Van Haaren, Harry
2017-06-07 13:09 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-06-05 7:23 ` Jerin Jacob
2017-06-06 10:06 ` Van Haaren, Harry
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E923DB57A917B54B9182A2E928D00FA640C143CF@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=harry.van.haaren@intel.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=keith.wiles@intel.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).