From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bruce Richardson Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/15] preparing l2fwd for eventmode additions Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:09:40 +0100 Message-ID: <20180619100939.GA23348@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1528477766-15788-1-git-send-email-anoob.joseph@caviumnetworks.com> <1528976946-14396-1-git-send-email-anoob.joseph@caviumnetworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Pablo de Lara , Jerin Jacob , Narayana Prasad , dev@dpdk.org To: Anoob Joseph Return-path: Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ED7D2C38 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 12:09:56 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 03:34:29PM +0530, Anoob Joseph wrote: > Hi Bruce, Pablo, > > Any comments on this series? > > Thanks, > Anoob > > On 14/06/18 17:18, Anoob Joseph wrote: > > This patchset modularizes l2fwd application to prepare it for eventmode > > additions. This patchset doesn't change the code flow or logic, except > > for few minor improvements. Some of the newly added functions are used > > in just one place, but is added for efficient usage with eventmode. > > > > v1: > > * Fix all checkpatch reported issues > > My main concern here is how much this eventmode addition is going to complicate the l2fwd example. l2fwd has always been a pretty basic example app to get users started on the basics of DPDK use, and I'm not sure how much we want to move away from that. Is this eventmode-l2fwd better being a separate app, to allow l2fwd to be kept as simple as it can be? Looking for more thoughts from others here, since it's a community decision as to the scope of the examples. /Bruce