From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/4] examples: add performance-thread
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2015 19:33:47 +0100
Message-ID: <1850494.rdblc2vbpm@xps13>
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>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Ian Betts <ian.betts@intel.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f50.google.com (mail-wm0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 426FA920C
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri,  4 Dec 2015 19:34:58 +0100 (CET)
Received: by wmww144 with SMTP id w144so72904516wmw.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 04 Dec 2015 10:34:58 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20151204100359.6b966aea@xeon-e3>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

2015-12-04 10:03, Stephen Hemminger:
> Looks useful, but this needs more discussion.
> 
> Maybe it should be a separate library not tied into DPDK so
> it gets wider use and testing? Also what are the limitations?
> What if an lthread did a system call? What about interaction
> with rte_poll?
> 
> Earlier attempts at lightweight threading (fibers) would be worth
> looking into. http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?CooperativeThreading
> Intel Thread Building Blocks
> IBM NGPT (now defunct)
> 
> There lots of hidden gotcha's here, like preemption (or not),
> and limitations on interactions with other libraries.
> 
> Intel may have some milestone to get it into DPDK 2.2 but
> really this seems too late...

Yes, sure it is too late to have enough discussions in 2.2 timeframe.