-----Original Message----- > Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 17:02:43 +0200 > From: Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]> > To: Jerin Jacob <[email protected]>, "Carrillo, Erik G" > <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], "Richardson, Bruce" <[email protected]>, "Van > Haaren, Harry" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" > <[email protected]>, "Eads, Gage" <[email protected]>, > "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "Vangati, Narender" > <[email protected]>, "Rao, Nikhil" <[email protected]>, > "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, > "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/1] eventtimer: introduce event timer > wheel > > 25/08/2017 12:25, Jerin Jacob: > > From: "Carrillo, Erik G" <[email protected]> > [...] > > > In summary, it looks like our solutions align fairly well, and I propose > > > that we take on the software implementation if there are no objections. > > > > Sure, no objection. > > Good to see such a basic function generalized for NPU and CPU. > > Are you going to use rte_timer for CPU implementation? > Does it mean that event_timer supersedes rte_timer?
IMO, we don't need to supersedes the rte_timer. The eventdev or event_timer is an optional component. It is application decision to use poll mode vs event driver model or combination of two.
