From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jerin Jacob Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ring: synchronize the load and store of the tail Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 11:10:58 +0000 Message-ID: <20181029111043.GA10781@jerin> References: <1537172244-64874-2-git-send-email-gavin.hu@arm.com> <20181029101612.GA4738@jerin> <3665103.RQOKKVgJhj@xps> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)" , "dev@dpdk.org" , Honnappa Nagarahalli , "stable@dpdk.org" , Ola Liljedahl , "olivier.matz@6wind.com" , "chaozhu@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "bruce.richardson@intel.com" , "konstantin.ananyev@intel.com" To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: In-Reply-To: <3665103.RQOKKVgJhj@xps> Content-Language: en-US Content-ID: 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, 29 Oct 2018 11:47:05 +0100 > From: Thomas Monjalon > To: Jerin Jacob , "Gavin Hu (Arm Technolo= gy > China)" > Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , Honnappa Nagarahalli > , "stable@dpdk.org" , Ola > Liljedahl , "olivier.matz@6wind.com" > , "chaozhu@linux.vnet.ibm.com" > , "bruce.richardson@intel.com" > , "konstantin.ananyev@intel.com" > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] ring: synchronize the load and store = of > the tail >=20 >=20 > 29/10/2018 11:16, Jerin Jacob: > > From: "Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)" > > > > > > Hi Thomas and Jerin, > > > > > > The patches were extensively reviewed by Arm internally, as the 1st p= atch was not able to be concluded, I created a new patch series(2 patches). > > > How can I clean up this mess? > > > 1. make all the previous patches Superseded? > > > 2. We have two more new patches, should I submit the 4 patches (the o= ld 2 patches + 2 new patches) with V2? > > > > I would suggest to supersede the old patches(not in this case, in any c= ase when you > > send new version and update the version number). >=20 > Why not in this case? I did not mean in this case particular. I meant in all cases. > There are some old patches in patchwork which should be superseded. >=20 > > I would suggest send new patches as separate series. If it has dependen= cy on > > exiting Acked patches please mention that in cover letter. >=20 > I would suggest also to stop top-posting, it doesn't help reading threads= . >=20 >=20 > > > From: Jerin Jacob > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon > > > > > 27/10/2018 17:00, Jerin Jacob: > > > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon > > > > > > > 17/10/2018 08:35, Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China): > > > > > > > > Hi Jerin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As the 1st one of the 3-patch set was not concluded, I subm= it this 2- > > > > patch series to unblock the merge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The thread is totally messed up because: > > > > > > > - there is no cover letter > > > > > > > - some different series (testpmd, i40e and doc) are i= n the same > > > > thread > > > > > > > - v4 replies to a different series > > > > > > > - this version should be a v5 but has no number > > > > > > > - this version replies to the v3 > > > > > > > - patchwork still shows v3 and "v5" > > > > > > > - replies from Ola are not quoting previous discussio= n > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Because of all of this, it is really difficult to follow. > > > > > > > This is probably the reason of the lack of review outside of = Arm. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One more issue: you must Cc the relevant maintainers. > > > > > > > Here: > > > > > > > - Olivier for rte_ring > > > > > > > - Chao for IBM platform > > > > > > > - Bruce and Konstantin for x86 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guys, it is really cool to have more Arm developpers in DPDK. > > > > > > > But please consider better formatting your discussions, it is > > > > > > > really important in our contribution workflow. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't know what to do. > > > > > > > I suggest to wait for more feedbacks and integrate it in -rc2= . > > > > > > > > > > > > This series has been acked and tested. Sure, if we are looking = for > > > > > > some more feedback we can push to -rc2 if not it a good candida= te to > > > > > > be selected for -rc1. > > > > > > > > > > It has been acked and tested only for Arm platforms. > > > > > And Olivier, the ring maintainer, was not Cc. > > > > > > > > > > I feel it is not enough. > > > > > > > > Sure, More reviews is already better. But lets keep as -rc2 target. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are = confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipi= ent, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents = to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the informati= on in any medium. Thank you. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20