Hi Akhil, > -----Original Message----- > From: Akhil Goyal <akhil.go...@nxp.com> > Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 4:05 PM > To: Iremonger, Bernard <bernard.iremon...@intel.com>; Thomas Monjalon > <tho...@monjalon.net> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; > ano...@marvell.com; jer...@marvell.com > Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 0/3] examples/ipsec-secgw: set default > > > > > > > > > > > 11/10/2019 14:40, Akhil Goyal: > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > This patchset would need ack from more vendors as it will impact > > > > > user > > > > experience > > > > > on a key example application which is normally demonstrated to > > > customers. > > > > > > > > > > IPSec library is still evolving and there are new functionality > > > > > added every > > > > release. > > > > > Atleast from NXP side we are not OK with this change. > > > > > > > > What can be changed in the library to make it acceptable as a > > > > default in this example? > > > > > > > > > > We are observing performance issues with ipsec library. So would > > > request other Vendors to confirm if they are OK with the performance > numbers. > > > > Could you give some details on the performance issues you are seeing. > > > > We were observing about 4-5% drop when using the ipsec-lib instead of the > Legacy code path. We would again measure it on RC1. That is why I say, I will > Hold this patch till RC2, unless some other vendor also confirms that.
Is there any update on performance measurements on 19.11-rc1 ? Regards, Bernard.