On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Paul Eggleton <[email protected]> wrote: > 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.)
yes recipes-benchmarking. > > Cheers, > Paul > > -- > > Paul Eggleton > Intel Open Source Technology Centre -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
