From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Remy Horton Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/6] lib: added new library for latency stats Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 06:48:30 +0000 Message-ID: <53c0d045-8497-3657-ced6-a1edd0cbb310@intel.com> References: <1484583573-30163-1-git-send-email-remy.horton@intel.com> <1484583573-30163-6-git-send-email-remy.horton@intel.com> <20170117042935.GA32676@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Reshma Pattan , Thomas Monjalon To: Jerin Jacob Return-path: Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E54EE106A for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 07:48:33 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <20170117042935.GA32676@localhost.localdomain> 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 17/01/2017 04:29, Jerin Jacob wrote: [..] > It is a value added feature for DPDK. But what is the plan for incorporating > the mbuf change? I have 8 month old mbuf change for ARM for natural > alignment. If we are accepting any mbuf change then we need to include > outstanding mbuf changes to avoid future ABI breakage. > > http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12878/ I know there's some discussion going on in the background regarding this. I've yet to hear a definite answer myself.. ..Remy