> -----Original Message----- > From: Ilya Maximets <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 10:46 PM > To: Mcnamara, John <[email protected]>; Hu, Jiayu > <[email protected]>; Maxime Coquelin <[email protected]>; Van > Haaren, Harry <[email protected]>; Morten Brørup > <[email protected]>; Richardson, Bruce > <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; Pai G, Sunil <[email protected]>; Stokes, > Ian <[email protected]>; Ferriter, Cian <[email protected]>; > [email protected]; [email protected]; O'Driscoll, Tim > <[email protected]>; Finn, Emma <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: OVS DPDK DMA-Dev library/Design Discussion > > ... > > FWIW, I think it makes sense to PoC and test options that are going to > be simply unavailable going forward if not explored now. > Especially because we don't have any good solutions anyway ("Deferral > of Work" is architecturally wrong solution for OVS).
I agree that there is value in doing PoCs and we have been doing that for over a year based on different proposals and none of them show the potential of the Deferral of Work approach. It isn't productive to keep building PoCs indefinitely; at some point we need to make progress with merging a specific solution upstream. > > Let's have another call so that we can move towards a single solution > that the DPDK and OVS communities agree on. I'll set up a call for next > week in a similar time slot to the previous one. > > Is there any particular reason we can't use a mailing list to discuss > that topic further? The discussion can continue on the mailing list. It just seemed more efficient and interactive to discuss this in a meeting. John --
