From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH] eal: Initial implementation of PQoS EAL extension Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 09:24:33 +0100 Message-ID: <2221343.vDGpEpgp97@xps13> References: <91026831.UvMIbM9v17@xps13> 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-f44.google.com (mail-wm0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 536AC2B9E for ; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 09:26:08 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f44.google.com with SMTP id c200so257294474wme.0 for ; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 00:26:08 -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" 2016-02-23 23:03, Kantecki, Tomasz: > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > If there is nothing specific in DPDK for PQos, why writing an example in > > DPDK? > The example makes it much easier to use the technology with DPDK. > > > Maybe the example should be better in the library itself. > The library in question (https://github.com/01org/intel-cmt-cat) has a couple of examples but none of them refers to DPDK. > > > I suggest to mention the library in > > doc/guides/linux_gsg/nic_perf_intel_platform.rst > Ok it can be added to this document. Does it imply -1 for the sample code idea? I may be wrong but I have the feeling the example is more about PQoS than DPDK. So yes, I would vote -1.