[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] examples/eventdev_pipeline: added sample app

[Hunt, David]

On 29/6/2017 8:17 AM, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
>> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 14:12:20 +0100
>> From: "Hunt, David" <david.hunt at intel.com>
>> To: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob at caviumnetworks.com>
>> CC: Harry van Haaren <harry.van.haaren at intel.com>, dev at dpdk.org, Gage Eads
>>   <gage.eads at intel.com>, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson at intel.com>
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] examples/eventdev_pipeline: added
>>   sample app
>> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
>>   Thunderbird/45.8.0
>>
>> Hi Jerin:
>>
>>
>> On 27/6/2017 10:35 AM, Jerin Jacob wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 15:46:47 +0100
>>>> From: "Hunt, David" <david.hunt at intel.com>
>>>> To: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob at caviumnetworks.com>, Harry van Haaren
>>>>    <harry.van.haaren at intel.com>
>>>> CC: dev at dpdk.org, Gage Eads <gage.eads at intel.com>, Bruce Richardson
>>>>    <bruce.richardson at intel.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] examples/eventdev_pipeline: added
>>>>    sample app
>>>> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
>>>>    Thunderbird/45.8.0
>>>>
>>>> Hi Jerin,
>>> Hi David,
>>>
>>> Looks like you have sent the old version. The below mentioned comments
>>> are not addressed in v2.
>> Oops. Glitch in the Matrix. I've just pushed a V3 with the changes.
>>
>>>> I'm assisting Harry on the sample app, and have just pushed up a V2 patch
>>>> based on your feedback. I've addressed most of your suggestions, comments
>>>> below. There may still a couple of outstanding questions that need further
>>>> discussion.
>>> A few general comments:
>>> 1) Nikhil/Gage's proposal on ethdev rx to eventdev adapter will change the major
>>> portion(eventdev setup and producer()) of this application
>>> 2) Producing one lcore worth of packets, really cant show as example
>>> eventdev application as it will be pretty bad in low-end machine.
>>> At least application infrastructure should not limit.
>>>
>>> Considering above points, Should we wait for rx adapter to complete
>>> first? I would like to show this as real world application to use eventdev.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> On the same note:
>>> Can we finalize on rx adapter proposal? I can work on v1 of patch and
>>> common code if Nikhil or Gage don't have bandwidth. Let me know?
>>>
>>> last followup:
>>> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-June/068776.html
>> I had a quick chat with Harry, and wonder if we'd be as well to merge the
>> app as it is now, and as the new frameworks become available, the app can be
>> updated to make use of them? I feel it would be better to have something out
>> there for people to play with than waiting for 17.11.
> I agree with your concern.
> How about renaming the test and doc specific to SW PMD and then once we
> fix the known issues with HW eventdev + ethdev(Rx adapter) integration and then
> rename the application to generic eventdev.
>

Sure. I'll rename the app as 'eventdev_pipeline_sw' and push a v4. we 
can rename back once it's generic.

Rgds,
Dave.


--snip--