[dpdk-ci] [dpdk-moving] proposal for DPDK CI improvement

[Thomas Monjalon]

2016-11-07 10:34, O'Driscoll, Tim:
> From: Jerome Tollet
> > 
> > Hi Thomas & Qian,
> > IMHO, performance results should be centralized and executed in a
> > trusted & controlled environment.
> > If official DPDK numbers are coming from private lab’s vendors,
> > perception might be that they are not 100% neutral. That would probably
> > not help DPDK community to be seen open & transparent.
> 
> +1
> 
> Somebody (Jan Blunck I think) also said on last week's call that
> performance testing was a higher priority than CI for a centralized lab.
> A model where we have centralized performance test and distributed CI
> might work well.

+1

Having some trusted performance numbers is a top priority.
I hope a budget in the foundation can solve it.

I was just trying to say that numbers from private labs can bring some
diversity and may be also valuable.