From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio: fix virtio_net_hdr desc pointing to
	the same buffer
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 13:44:54 +0100
Message-ID: <2070148.TLndilS6eD@xps13>
References: <1449763652-86292-1-git-send-email-huawei.xie@intel.com>
 <1485514.3e9eA57k0j@xps13> <20151214114732.GB29571@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>, "Xie,
 Huawei" <huawei.xie@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f53.google.com (mail-wm0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C900E37B3
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 13:46:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wm0-f53.google.com with SMTP id p66so42216839wmp.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 04:46:10 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20151214114732.GB29571@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

2015-12-14 19:47, Yuanhan Liu:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:32:24AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 2015-12-14 11:01, Yuanhan Liu:
> > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 12:07:32AM +0800, Huawei@dpdk.org wrote:
> > > > The virtio_net_hdr desc all pointed to the same buffer. It doesn't cause
> > > > issue because in the simple TX mode we don't use the header. This patch
> > > > makes the header desc point to different buffer.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Huawei Xie <huawei.xie@intel.com>
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
> > 
> > Does it fix something in the current behaviour?
> 
> It's more like a logic fixing to me.
> 
> > I have the feeling it may wait for 2.3.
> 
> It's been introduced in v2.2, with Huawei's simple tx patchset.
> Therefore, I guess 2.2 is good to go?

The vhost driver has been validated without with patch.
Merging it would be taking the risk of breaking something
(or just reduce performance) for no clear benefit.
Am I missing something?