From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH] eal: Initial implementation of PQoS EAL extension Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:22:40 +0100 Message-ID: <5212003.dKKWlXxaE8@xps13> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: "Kantecki, Tomasz" Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (mail-wm0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 346679E7 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:24:15 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f52.google.com with SMTP id a4so162449604wme.1 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 05:24:15 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 2016-02-22 13:12, Kantecki, Tomasz: > Off the mail list, we received feedback that extending EAL commands is not an option due to Intel Architecture nature of CAT. > Consequently, we changed direction when working on V2 PQoS patches in roder to: > - reduce DPDK PQoS code print and reuse existing open source code > - remove IA specific options from EAL > > Current V2 patch, yet to be shared on the mail-list in a few days, implements a sample code (reuse of skeleton) that links against existing 01.org PQoS library. This eliminates need for code included in V1 librte_pqos patch. > The same sample code implements a C module that parses application specific part of the command line with CAT configuration options (same format as V1 EAL command). The module is easy to re-use in other applications as needed. > In the future, if there is a need to change this C module into a regular DPDK library then we'll be happy to do so. > > Are you OK with concept behind V2 PQoS patch as described above? So you mean that PQoS don't really need some DPDK integration? You just want to show how to use it with DPDK?