From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: API change notice for librte_meter Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 16:48:56 +0200 Message-ID: <2258321.CxPN5KWo1L@xps> References: <1501852780-191124-1-git-send-email-cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com> <3871111.0JZd9azV8i@xps> <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891267BA8A968@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: "Horton, Remy" , dev@dpdk.org, "Mcnamara, John" , "Singh, Jasvinder" , "Nicolau, Radu" , "Hunt, David" To: "Dumitrescu, Cristian" Return-path: Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D762F326C for ; Fri, 4 Aug 2017 16:48:58 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891267BA8A968@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 04/08/2017 16:38, Dumitrescu, Cristian: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > 04/08/2017 15:19, Cristian Dumitrescu: > > > +* librte_meter: The API will change to accommodate configuration > > profiles. > > > + Most of the API functions will have an additional opaque parameter. > > > > Why? > > Why opaque parameter? > > If you want to use it with a configuration file, you just have to > > implement a configuration file in your application. > > > > Moreover, I already explained my fear of adding this library in DPDK > > which is really an application-level statistics lib. > > > > Without more explanations, my vote is a nack. > > > > However I remember there was a promise to merge every metrics libs in > > one. > > Thomas, > > Confusion with librte_metrics, which is a totally different library? This is about librte_meter, nothing to do with stats/metrics. Yes you're right! Sorry for the confusion. > This librte_meter is doing traffic metering, essentially the computing the packet color according to the IETF RFCs 2697 (srTCM = Single Rate Three Color Marker) and 2698 (trTCM = Two Rate Three Color Marker). This is a fundamental block for pretty much every edge router upstream path. > > You asked me on numerous occasions to be concise, so here is a concise deprecation notice. I have to say initially I wrote a more laborious one, then I remembered your advice and cut it down to this version. Thanks for being concise :) > Do you need more details on the motivation? Yes we need to understand why the configuration profiles must be managed by the API instead of separately.