> -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Richardson > Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 10:10 AM > To: Thomas Monjalon > Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Kantecki, Tomasz > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: Initial implementation of PQoS EAL > extension > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 09:24:33AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 2016-02-23 23:03, Kantecki, Tomasz: > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 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. > > > Well, the intersection of DPDK and PQoS is what the example is really all > about, > and as such it is relevant to both DPDK and the library itself. Platform QoS > can be of great use to packet processing applications for helping to ensure > that > the app gets the resources it needed - especially in a virtualised world - and > so we believe that having an example in DPDK showing how to use PQoS with DPDK > is well worthwhile having. It's more effective than a simple doc update in > raising awareness of the existence of the feature, and also provides for DPDK > users a readily available app for the user to start playing with to evaluate > PQoS for their own use-cases.
+1 I also think it is a good thing to have. Again user don't have to trust the whitepapers - instead he can run the app and measure performance gain on his particular platform. Konstantin > I also fail to see what the downside of having the sample app is - it won't > add > significantly to the project maintenance overhead. > > Regards, > /Bruce
