> -----Original Message----- > From: Ananyev, Konstantin > Sent: Saturday, June 3, 2017 11:23 AM > To: Van Haaren, Harry <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Cc: Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]>; Jerin Jacob > <[email protected]>; > Richardson, Bruce <[email protected]>; Wiles, Keith > <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [RFCv2] service core concept
<snip> > > In particular this version of the API enables applications that are not > > aware of services to > > benefit from the services concept, as EAL args can be used to setup > > services and service > cores. > > With this design, switching to/from SW/HW PMD is transparent to the > > application. An example > > use-case is the Eventdev HW PMD to Eventdev SW PMD that requires a service > > core. > > > > I have noted the implementation comments that were raised on the v1. For > > v2, I think our > time > > is better spent looking at the API design, and I will handle implementation > > feedback in the > > follow-up patchset to v2 RFC. > > > > Below a summary of what we are trying to achieve, and the current API > > design. > > Have a good weekend! Cheers, -Harry > > > Looks good to me in general. > The only comment I have - do we really need to put it into rte_eal_init() > and a new EAL command-line parameter for it? > Might be better to leave it to the particular app to decide. There are a number of options here, each with its own merit: A) Services/cores config in EAL Benefit is that service functionality can be transparent to the application. Negative is that the complexity is in EAL. B) Application configures services/cores Benefit is no added EAL complexity. Negative is that application code has to configure cores (duplicated per application). To answer this question, I think we need to estimate how many applications would benefit from EAL integration and balance that against the "complexity cost" of doing so. I do like the simplicity of option (B), however if there is significant value in total transparency to the application I think (A) is the better choice. Input on A) or B) welcomed! -Harry
