17/05/2017 16:51, Wiles, Keith: > > > On May 17, 2017, at 4:28 AM, Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> wrote: > > > > OK to register CPU needs for services (including interrupts processing). > > > > Then we could take this opportunity to review how threads are managed. > > We will have three types of cores: > > - not used > > - reserved for services > > - used for polling / application processing > > It is fine to reserve/define CPU from DPDK point of view. > > > > Then DPDK launch threads on cores. Maybe we should allow the application > > to choose how threads are launched and managed. > > Keith was talking about a plugin approach for thread management I think. > Thomas, > So, not to hijack this thread or maybe I misunderstood your comment I changed > the subject. > > Maybe we can look at the plugin model for a DPDK threading model to allow > someone to use their own threading solution. > > Is this required or just another enhancement?
It is another enhancement. As the service core would be a new API, we should check that it is compatible with a possible evolution of the underlying thread model. And I think it can be a good opportunity to draw a complete view of how DPDK could evolve regarding the thread model.
