From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75266C433ED for ; Wed, 19 May 2021 23:06:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1D896112F for ; Wed, 19 May 2021 23:06:45 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D1D896112F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dev-bounces@dpdk.org Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2FB240143; Thu, 20 May 2021 01:06:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84E3640041 for ; Thu, 20 May 2021 01:06:40 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-SDR: YjDzO/LHry/jobhZUjPkmqncVRG1qn7EPG5vtYLwbwfuKkMB2fyXnRp/3ewUze0R7zxWTnh1Yb GlZBw7IEVFyQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,9989"; a="201147356" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.82,313,1613462400"; d="scan'208";a="201147356" Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 May 2021 16:06:39 -0700 IronPort-SDR: MTazMNsWqM07iaGVAbD4tRanhbUrRcCrGGpcFmlfcfNWiztJJpHQ4ktf3LWR/hZYxDgpi1cxjT jcwCxCoVxkug== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.82,313,1613462400"; d="scan'208";a="411941029" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.213.224.148]) ([10.213.224.148]) by orsmga002-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 May 2021 16:06:38 -0700 To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: dev@dpdk.org References: <20210409152145.2550755-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <20210512160443.1155817-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <1815996.xcznKAnzVg@thomas> From: Ferruh Yigit X-User: ferruhy Message-ID: <854acb0d-22dc-f5ef-b234-c2c8eeceb654@intel.com> Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 00:06:34 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1815996.xcznKAnzVg@thomas> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: clarify PMD order in release notes X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 5/19/2021 9:42 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 12/05/2021 18:04, Ferruh Yigit: >> PMD updates are expected in alphabetical order based on their vendor >> name. Clarify this expectation in the section comment. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit >> --- >> - * Device abstraction libs and PMDs >> + * Device abstraction libs and PMDs (PMDs ordered alphabetically by vendor name) > > I would avoid the repetition of "PMDs". > May I apply with this modification? > Ack, if it is not too late.