From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/17] Wind River Systems AVP PMD vs
	virtio?
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 11:55:35 +0100
Message-ID: <78399437.9zD9LecKHj@xps13>
References: <1488414008-162839-1-git-send-email-allain.legacy@windriver.com>
 <4b3a0ff4-3d19-8e4b-0cbf-2a08e6433285@6wind.com>
 <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA7231E927@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: Vincent JARDIN <vincent.jardin@6wind.com>, "Legacy,
 Allain (Wind River)" <allain.legacy@windriver.com>, "Yigit,
 Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org, "Jolliffe,
 Ian (Wind River)" <ian.jolliffe@windriver.com>, "Wiles,
 Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>, techboard@dpdk.org
To: "O'Driscoll, Tim" <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com (mail-wm0-f51.google.com [74.125.82.51])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1065628F3
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 11:55:37 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wm0-f51.google.com with SMTP id t189so19678009wmt.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 03:55:37 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA7231E927@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <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>

2017-03-15 04:10, O'Driscoll, Tim:
> I've included a couple of specific comments inline below, and a general comment here.
> 
> We have somebody proposing to add a new driver to DPDK. It's standalone and doesn't affect any of the core libraries. They're willing to maintain the driver and have included a patch to update the maintainers file. They've also included the relevant documentation changes. I haven't seen any negative comment on the patches themselves except for a request from John McNamara for an update to the Release Notes that was addressed in a later version. I think we should be welcoming this into DPDK rather than questioning/rejecting it.
> 
> I'd suggest that this is a good topic for the next Tech Board meeting.

I agree Tim.
CC'ing techboard to add this item to the agenda of the next meeting.