On 2024-07-29 08:34, Wathsala Wathawana Vithanage wrote:
...to have a non-zero chance of getting accepted.
I see too much uncertainty in that statement with "non-zero chance". As the
maintainer
of this library and someone with the community's best interest in mind, can you
outline
the requirements for a rte_csrand implementation with a higher degree of
confidence?
I want to know the criteria that must be satisfied for the acceptance
probability to be
close to 1. I'm sorry if I have not been abundantly clear on the requirements
that I thought
you would look for in such a patch. Maybe I misread your previous email.
Without a rationale why rte_csrand() functionality is something that
should be in DPDK, and a rationale why the ARM CPU CSRNG is superior to
getentropy(), it doesn't really matter how the patch set looks like.
I've repeatedly asked for this information, and you've repeatedly
ignored it. This does not further your cause.
That's circular. "The reason we want this feature implementation to be
included is to satisfy those who want this feature implementation."
Stop thinking like an ARM developer on a "software enablement" mission, and
start thinking like a DPDK library or application developer.
We all think different in one way or the other, but what's more important is
finding a
common ground.
