On Wed, 27 Jan 2016 14:28:47 Khem Raj wrote: > > On Jan 27, 2016, at 2:16 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 09:20:23AM -0500, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:24:43AM +0000, Burton, Ross wrote: > >>> On 26 January 2016 at 03:34, Denys Dmytriyenko <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> A clean room re-implementation and extension of the original stress > >>>> tool. > >>> > >>> What's the rationale for adding this to oe-core over another layer? > >> > >> None, besides the original stress is in oe-core. What other layer would > >> you > >> suggest? > > > > Ross, > > > > Care do make your own suggestion? Do you think meta-oe would be a better > > fit? Are there any other considerations, since stress-ng is a replacement > > of the original stress and it was added to oe-core? Thanks. > > IIRC we had meta-benchmarking. They all should go there.
I guess you mean meta-oe/recipes-benchmark (though an actual separate layer might be interesting.) Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
