From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] add one option memory-only for secondary processes Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 05:00:22 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <2296434.5EpfcH711R@xps13> References: <1417601518-16852-1-git-send-email-xiaobo.chi@nsn.com> <20150122111732.GA4580@bricha3-MOBL3> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org To: "Chi, Xiaobo (NSN - CN/Hangzhou)" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150122111732.GA4580@bricha3-MOBL3> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" 2015-01-22 11:17, Bruce Richardson: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 09:05:34AM +0000, Chi, Xiaobo (NSN - CN/Hangz= hou) wrote: > > Hi, Bruce, > > Since the DPDK2.0 merge window is opened now, so is it possible for= this patch to be one candidate for v2.0? > > I searched in the DPDK patchwork(http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/= project/dpdk/list/?state=3D*&q=3Dmemory-only&archive=3Dboth ), but can = not find this V2 patch. Can you please help to check why? Thanks a lot.= > >=20 > > Filters: Search =3D memory-only remove filter > > Patch=09 Date=09Submitter=09Delegate=09State > > [dpdk-dev] add one option memory-only for those secondary PRBs=0920= 14-12-02=09chixiaobo=09=09Not Applicable > > [dpdk-dev] add one option memory-only for those secondary PRBs=0920= 14-12-02=09chixiaobo=09=09Changes Requested > >=20 > > Brgs, > > Chi Xiaobo > >=20 > That's a question that Thomas is better able to answer than me, since= he is the > man with control over patchwork! :-) >=20 > Thomas, any feedback here? I have no log for this kind of problem. But I know that patchwork ignores emails with special characters. And in your commit log, there are some in "mechanism and it?=EF=BF=BD=EF= =BF=BDs upper libs". Moreover, this commit log should be wrapped. A quick look shows also that some spaces/tabs are missing. It was a v2 and there is no change log. Please submit a v3 after cleaning. I didn't review this patch and nobody gave its Acked-by. So at the moment, it's pending. I'll try to review v3 carefully. Other comments are welcome. I feel this patch can break some important = things. Which tests have you done? (it could be described in commit log) Last point: I don't like the current implementation of secondary proces= s and Ericsson wanted to discuss their own implementation: =09http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-December/009796.html --=20 Thomas