[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/6] Move common functions in eal_thread.c

2015-04-25 Thread Ravi Kerur
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 6:02 AM, Neil Horman wrote: > On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 08:32:42AM -0400, Neil Horman wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 06:45:06PM -0700, Ravi Kerur wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Ravi Kerur wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 12:51

[dpdk-dev] Beyond DPDK 2.0

2015-04-25 Thread Wiles, Keith
On 4/25/15, 8:30 AM, "Marc Sune" wrote: > > >On 24/04/15 19:51, Matthew Hall wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 12:39:47PM -0500, Jay Rolette wrote: >>> I can tell you that if DPDK were GPL-based, my company wouldn't be >>>using >>> it. I suspect we wouldn't be the only ones... >>> >>> Jay >> I

[dpdk-dev] Beyond DPDK 2.0

2015-04-25 Thread Marc Sune
On 24/04/15 19:51, Matthew Hall wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 12:39:47PM -0500, Jay Rolette wrote: >> I can tell you that if DPDK were GPL-based, my company wouldn't be using >> it. I suspect we wouldn't be the only ones... >> >> Jay > I could second this, from the past employer where I used i

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/6] Move common functions in eal_thread.c

2015-04-25 Thread Neil Horman
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 08:32:42AM -0400, Neil Horman wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 06:45:06PM -0700, Ravi Kerur wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Ravi Kerur wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Neil Horman > > > wrote: > > > > > >> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/6] Move common functions in eal_thread.c

2015-04-25 Thread Neil Horman
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 06:45:06PM -0700, Ravi Kerur wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Ravi Kerur wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Neil Horman > > wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 12:21:23PM -0700, Ravi Kerur wrote: > >> > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Ne

[dpdk-dev] Beyond DPDK 2.0

2015-04-25 Thread Neil Horman
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 02:55:33PM -0500, Jay Rolette wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Neil Horman wrote: > > > So, I hear your arguments, and its understandable that you might not want > > a GPL > > licensed product, given that the DPDK is a library (though I'm not sure > > what the > >