From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] Use an accessor for rte_hash_key
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 17:15:27 +0000
Message-ID: <a0c1a0ca-e928-a463-2cbb-9692f68d11c7@intel.com>
References: <1503086972-32649-1-git-send-email-mike.stolarchuk@bigswitch.com>
 <4317181.EN77ZZiejQ@xps>
 <E115CCD9D858EF4F90C690B0DCB4D8976CC366FD@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <CA+Qp4XxCpfX7r5-WzjmD8fWb+e+kwV6Pg-N4CMhXYUfAF=rHqQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <E115CCD9D858EF4F90C690B0DCB4D8976CC3E7CA@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
 Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>
To: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>,
 Mike Stolarchuk <mike.stolarchuk@bigswitch.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 871393576
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri,  1 Mar 2019 18:15:30 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <E115CCD9D858EF4F90C690B0DCB4D8976CC3E7CA@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
Content-Language: en-US
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>

On 10/27/2017 4:31 PM, pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com (De Lara Guarch, Pablo)
wrote:
>> From: Mike Stolarchuk [mailto:mike.stolarchuk at bigswitch.com]
>> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 4:00 PM
>> To: De Lara Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com>
>> Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net>; Richardson, Bruce
>> <bruce.richardson at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/7] Use an accessor for rte_hash_key
>>
>> Pablo,
>>
>> Also, what about the other patch?
>> the use of a static variable in a recursive call? obviously incorrect for a
>> threaded environment ... has that been accepted?
> 
> Hi Mike,
> 
> Yes, that patch was accepted.

Hi Pablo, Mike,

The patch is remaining from 2017 and sitting on the patchwork without any comment.

I am marking the patchset as rejected, if they are still relevant please send a
new version on top of latest repo.

Sorry for any inconvenience caused.

For reference patches:
https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/27668/
https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/27669/
https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/27670/
https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/27671/

> 
> Thanks,
> Pablo
> 
>>
>> regards,
>> mts.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:10 AM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo
>> <pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas at monjalon.net]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 2:59 PM
>>> To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson at intel.com>; De Lara Guarch,
>>> Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com>
>>> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; mstolarchuk <mike.stolarchuk at bigswitch.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/7] Use an accessor for rte_hash_key
>>>
>>> 18/08/2017 22:09, mstolarchuk:
>>>> Improves consistency, allows identifcation of use-sites
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: mstolarchuk <mike.stolarchuk at bigswitch.com>
>>>
>>> Any comment on this patch and others from the same author?
>> Hi,
>>
>> Two of the patches submitted are actually the same, although they have a
>> different enumeration.
>> The patches look like they were part of two different patchsets, so it doesn't
>> look right.
>> Also, patch 6/6 is not applicable anymore, as a similar fix was sent
>> previously.
>>
>> Mike, could you send another patchset, that is rebased on top of the latest
>> code?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Pablo
> 
>