-----Original Message-----

Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 17:02:43 +0200
From: Thomas Monjalon <redacted>
To: Jerin Jacob <redacted>, "Carrillo, Erik G"
 [off-list ref]
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Richardson, Bruce" <redacted>, "Van
 Haaren, Harry" [off-list ref], "hemant.agrawal@nxp.com"
 [off-list ref], "Eads, Gage" [off-list ref],
 "nipun.gupta@nxp.com" [off-list ref], "Vangati, Narender"
 [off-list ref], "Rao, Nikhil" [off-list ref],
 "pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com" [off-list ref],
 "jianbo.liu@linaro.org" [off-list ref], "rsanford@akamai.com"
 [off-list ref]
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/1] eventtimer: introduce event timer
 wheel

25/08/2017 12:25, Jerin Jacob:

quoted

From: "Carrillo, Erik G" <redacted>

[...]

quoted

quoted

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.