From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jerin Jacob Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] event/sw: change worker rings to standard event rings Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2017 11:06:23 +0530 Message-ID: <20170704053622.GA14375@jerin> References: <20170607133620.275801-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <20170630150621.156365-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <20170630150621.156365-6-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <20170703124439.GA9022@jerin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "olivier.matz@6wind.com" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "dev@dpdk.org" To: "Van Haaren, Harry" Return-path: Received: from NAM01-BY2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2nam01on0041.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.34.41]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6697B2C8 for ; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 07:36:41 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" -----Original Message----- > Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2017 13:01:47 +0000 > From: "Van Haaren, Harry" > To: Jerin Jacob > CC: "olivier.matz@6wind.com" , "Richardson, Bruce" > , "dev@dpdk.org" > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/5] event/sw: change worker rings to > standard event rings > > > rings > > > > > > > > Now that we have a standard event ring implementation for passing events > > > > core-to-core, use that in place of the custom event rings in the software > > > > eventdev. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson > > > > > > Agree with 99% of this patch, but due to the implementation (with memzone lookup), > > > we need to change one part of the sw_port_setup() function. > > > > > > The change is required to allow port_setup() to be called multiple times on the same > > > port, which is required to re-configure a port that has already been configured once. > > > > > > I can send a separate fix, or I could re-spin Bruce's 5 patches, and include the fix. > > > > > > Given this is a small, non-datapath modification to the SW PMD, my preference is to > > > ack this patch once I've posted a separate patch fix for the SW PMD. > > > > > > @Jerin, any preference? > > > > I think, you can send it as a separate patch. I can squash the fix patch with this > > patch or apply it as separate one if you are not concerned about > > breaking when we do "git bisect". Let me know. > > Can be squashed then, please and thanks! > > Then this patch itself (5/5) is > > Acked-by: Harry van Haaren Applied this series to dpdk-next-eventdev/master after squashing http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/26241/ Thanks