From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FD50A04FD for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 10:51:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E70651C2A8; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 10:51:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CA941C2A7 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 10:51:42 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1578995501; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=lSsRGiipHud/zODpqK8QFMjuDHJXLvx64zt7VH0JoOg=; b=buN+IiOJ3gx3ypLrogtcvJfQsOC+urt2u7a92tJ6Y8LcxFmQqlttTlVqflnfagcdg/kf63 XSO+YxksSIM3bGgNPhRNXuRtT7ydcl9tSgCmeRXeiVfiOAt8Yhx/uccrRGAWVVrEv9m+W1 XUU6tH16wT2WuuCWBafck1d4NyhUFEs= Received: from mail-vk1-f198.google.com (mail-vk1-f198.google.com [209.85.221.198]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-244-d8aOXpEfOhGMAIicZZDnoQ-1; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 04:51:38 -0500 Received: by mail-vk1-f198.google.com with SMTP id a20so5581731vkm.22 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 01:51:38 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=eLrdF5LWiI7T8KBmgs8+R0hzBi1OD8HE4HaCXIhlOnI=; b=QqUIlXzqwExDig6u5wCJOwLB87Q2hhoMDFebb3Js4/yI2ukyFP1ZTbUy5z7QyNxAtx OeigRonXzdRG2Z4TlnG1B+5vnQZ4Ce5L0KHz/WU9I4tYcq4HuYXdbJO6h1wB1eQI+fE9 p0saG1pVrmx9EljUgCrreoOPpk/aiDaiGq74tzhhJisevxPUwLah/Z9Du907Ux6dMPjV gMqn2GV7RBIWlCD778ykk9HYhygsZcJsEzz9Nwro/SgWMIPooTInrBu5mU0ZPjoWZDa6 0tYdxIxYNiDYWc3mbwadvE/2fgJqzxNP6+OvVdOK9gR5HGvGiVhbOzmCWnC8wxC1dkX8 E6NQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUu08Jqx3aidfW0XRdUrGArJQP1puuElaKNnTF0Heb+z/DZCHPo X2Shf7cFiCPwx8P48W3zbNHt9H7yew5wBwfW9aK8CjV2WLPwNVQAPtqEh3PhoZ+Vp9GNuTWhhCz uTqBLhMyhLrG3qdI7xw== X-Received: by 2002:ab0:902:: with SMTP id w2mr338423uag.41.1578995497770; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 01:51:37 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyBRdRFOHJIgrQ3eyTXHCX4kSY1wwA+Y4l6TydTZGrVDIjNILOwF+cRQWnkbSEW8OgwBWShgaNFtckOpzAwuPg= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:902:: with SMTP id w2mr338395uag.41.1578995497241; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 01:51:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <9DEEADBC57E43F4DA73B571777FECECA41E9E23A@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <2347250.TLnPLrj5Ze@xps> In-Reply-To: <2347250.TLnPLrj5Ze@xps> From: David Marchand Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 10:51:26 +0100 Message-ID: To: Thomas Monjalon , "Chen, Zhaoyan" Cc: "Zhang, XuemingX" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "Yigit, Ferruh" , "Xu, Qian Q" , "Mcnamara, John" , "Yu, PingX" , Ali Alnubani , ci@dpdk.org X-MC-Unique: d8aOXpEfOhGMAIicZZDnoQ-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] Master compilation failures in Intel CI X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ci-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "ci" On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 9:04 AM Thomas Monjalon wrote= : > > 14/01/2020 08:18, Chen, Zhaoyan: > > - most of the patches in patchset are aimed to specific PMD driver, > > but just several patches for makefile/build script/config file(commo= n files).. in patchset. > > (e.g. https://patchwork.dpdk.org/patch/64384/) > > This kind of patchset will be pointed to dpdk master The problem with this patch is that it changes the MAINTAINERS file itself. The "guess" script works on the origin/master version of the file, not after the patch is applied. So the script will point at dpdk master anyway for the patch you mentioned, since drivers/common are currently going through master. I'd say those situations are rare and we must look carefully to set the subtree when adding a new component. > > We should filter out config/, mk/ and MAINTAINERS in the decision. I prepared a change for this. > > > > - one patchset includes document change and other specific PMD driver c= hange. > > This kind of patchset will be pointed to dpdk master > > For doc/, we must make sure each part of the doc is well sorted > in MAINTAINERS so we can distinguish crypto and ethdev docs for instance. The doc/ pattern is currently filtered out, if this is what you are referring to. > > For these 2 situations, basically, next-* branches are ahead of master, > > developers expected their patches could be tested on next-*, since that= is code base under developing. > > > > So applying these kinds of patchsets to next-* are more meaningful for = them. > > I agree. I sent an update on MAINTAINERS, and I am about to send the change that filters mk/, config/ and MAINTAINERS. Can you give me a list of patchsets you think are problematic so that I can test them? Thanks. --=20 David Marchand