Mattias, Yes that’s correct.
-----Original Message----- From: Mattias Rönnblom <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, September 8, 2023 12:28 AM To: Sevincer, Abdullah <[email protected]>; Stephen Hemminger <[email protected]>; Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; Tyler Retzlaff <[email protected]> Subject: Re: quick thread in DLB2 On 2023-09-08 00:09, Sevincer, Abdullah wrote: > Hi Stephen, > It is probing ports for best CPU. Yes it collects cycles. We may rework in > the future. Best, in what sense? Is this some kind of topology exploration? One DLB port being closer to (cheaper to access for) certain cores? > Open to suggestions. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Hemminger <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 12:45 PM > To: Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]> > Cc: Sevincer, Abdullah <[email protected]>; [email protected]; > Tyler Retzlaff <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: quick thread in DLB2 > > On Fri, 01 Sep 2023 16:08:48 +0200 > Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello Abdullah, >> >> In the DLB2 code, I see a thread is created for a single operation: >> In drivers/event/dlb2/pf/base/dlb2_resource.c >> pthread_create(&pthread, NULL, &dlb2_pp_profile_func, >> &dlb2_thread_data[i]); and just after: >> pthread_join(pthread, NULL); >> >> Can we avoid creating this thread? >> I guess no, because it must spawn on a specific CPU. >> >> > > The per thread data seems to break lots of expectations in EAL. > It all seems to be about capturing the number of cycles on different cores. > Looks like a mess.
