From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ye Xiaolong <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] igb_uio: remove out-of-date comment
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 16:13:37 +0800
Message-ID: <20190131081337.GB17292@intel.com>
References: <20190115154626.34516-1-xiaolong.ye@intel.com>
 <20190116003452.37403-1-xiaolong.ye@intel.com>
 <20190115173822.25a4a979@shemminger-XPS-13-9360>
 <20190116074836.GB39571@intel.com>
 <20190116105521.0254cdb2@shemminger-XPS-13-9360>
 <20190117021354.GA47093@intel.com>
 <bfa1e24f-a34e-54dc-13ef-04b31f1150ad@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>, dev@dpdk.org
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D1291B3EC
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 31 Jan 2019 09:14:35 +0100 (CET)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <bfa1e24f-a34e-54dc-13ef-04b31f1150ad@intel.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

Hi, Ferruh

On 01/29, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
[snip]
>
>Hi Xiaolong,
>
>Your analysis looks correct, thanks for history provided, it seems renaming
>"state" to "status" was not correct [1].
>
>The intention of the 'pci_check_and_mask_intx()' is mask the interrupt if it is
>from this device, so your suggestion looks correct to me.
>
>Only concern is how we can test the change, most probably existing code is also
>failing but able to find its way since it is not tested fully. To be sure we are
>also not missing anything, I think better to test the code before getting it.
>Are you aware of any way to test updated code?
>

Yes, I am also thinking about how to verify the change, will update once I find
a proper method.

>
>And related to the initial patch, removing the comment, I think the comment is
>informative within the context of 'igbuio_pci_irqhandler()', so I suggest moving
>if from begging of the function into it just above legacy interrupt change.
>

Sure, will do.

Thanks,
Xiaolong

>[1]
>5b2f8137 ("igb_uio: fix typos for kernel older than 3.3")
>
>
>Thanks,
>ferruh