From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A18DA489A9; Thu, 23 Oct 2025 01:06:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C5BD40262; Thu, 23 Oct 2025 01:06:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pl1-f176.google.com (mail-pl1-f176.google.com [209.85.214.176]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9044F4025E for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2025 01:06:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pl1-f176.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-27c369f898fso1892655ad.3 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2025 16:06:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; t=1761174367; x=1761779167; darn=dpdk.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=7StokxVg2GJ1FkL6tLeEyZEIszhxHfEIN0RimZyVess=; b=dCj4uSek7+fX9KaIkr9lAMny4fXNJ1dU9zdEMNa4etQLQ+uc8Q8h7yBvwWEtIo8+YU xZ9NZRXVIfzwt8DNy2RIN/Yi5lS+A4A/K4ZnUI2fisHDPOj8d2lgrHmxjp3DTQrDt7ib 5qifvfMfbJCywQwY3jQKvm95OTjDOx18hCtZ4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1761174367; x=1761779167; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=7StokxVg2GJ1FkL6tLeEyZEIszhxHfEIN0RimZyVess=; b=fAiXrpgXdQLIgIP6sdgsa5W3cjXWq/X53xwChXGMPo/CMWVhSFnkJYVtoYrINmKEuw jmrab3LQ7OurD2bSgKBpfd+7ZT0fypz5dcddzAm6bZhx1stD4c+BI9qV3MpZZQfZ2fpR BiAztrZOWRvnl7ESbKcE1EWwdfQuJJD5WoFDS0UFlMZcUn+IoAm+N3/bz1OkK1TtElXR +cyhkL5BiLFrymTNfJIcosM4g4610hgL+ygsZCN3d9zJ8w8I2ANTG3rwI4bxT5Vvb8o/ IDUwwL2GhHTM1KtU652aejMOa2rAFDU+HGwMftdGz0Q9oLD0D1+4uPGglWdusOWgapQQ iQLQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YycBnEI49j/Whx16NNXZ7sR+srGXnJFQAipeIkGSUCxuFK2EG6L +Qgvoc6AJsnr0ZOzx/5YLOAtmHdE5CLJcYH6juIA4Avz01KCtlDERmpqiuqocQZ1snhmdCM6H8h +J1nKlqZRTzwZrlRWaxiTVpCqH9FskwGnkF/hHmmZwg== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctVzh5vwOFNMWQyOSFyxfSQ+zbdBtFmCeDH9rcKTubm+JgcKmxNmKQuDzq77pl WLLF1gLAaA6QdAOb35P6zUFrv0bjxzH/YtRZt5reAKpdpewsRlS5NsqGLYPiaNps2V7qIAKCZFE nw9mP3d7zr+T53n01FfZBlkhwF3qbTZvfleKrF26RPKqTyzMA/BR4u4qO/pl0GRNOxMn9CENoEX rIvCGAdcURhvEQCRfvLH1gVSPQtSFx77g1+pesawIy9BNUUjA0AOtcmCpeNKbBGD2pRD9k8NPYa xJFAkDxEih+2NQKL9Nk5bIjBsFuR X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHLDApjBAlSASlMx49duWhWpOJArbyWWHjkPybV5aU9AH1SkpgkDDZ9T3URYMi7IRY9QEHr9SnZ4Ga051e7cW4= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:c943:b0:26d:d860:3dae with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-290c9c93ac6mr274442115ad.3.1761174367504; Wed, 22 Oct 2025 16:06:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Patrick Robb Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2025 19:05:15 -0400 X-Gm-Features: AS18NWAL9gTVxskkvNw6Bq-NU7cveomS2LiF12DzWaqjW3HVXuLz0aNMw4bDPVU Message-ID: Subject: Re: BNXT patches To: Ajit Khaparde Cc: ci@dpdk.org, Ali Alnubani Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000901ec90641c75ce1" X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ci-bounces@dpdk.org --000000000000901ec90641c75ce1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Ajit, That sounds annoying. A sanity check question to start - is there any sense in resubmitting the series and just intentionally delaying sending the 2nd half of the commits? I.e. 1. git send-email /my-patches-dir/* 2. Send the first 30 3. At prompt for 31st patch, pause. 4. wait 10 minutes. 5. Return to terminal, send patches 31 through 57. Or, if this is not possible, I think there should be some solution on the patchwork mail server policy side. I think Ali Alnubani from NVIDIA manages it and he is usually pretty responsive with such modification requests. We could ask about solutions like: 1. Add a complete exception to the mail server message rate restriction for emails coming from email addresses associated with DPDK member companies. or 2. Simply make the message rate restrictions more permissive than they are currently (i.e. allow 100 emails, not 30). If the ideas above will not work, I will have to assess the "bundle" idea tomorrow when I have time available than I do right now. Most likely it's technically possible to facilitate but I do feel like simply resolving the original issue (the mail server is not letting you submit your series) and allowing the CI system automation to intake the patchseries from patchwork in the normal way is the ideal approach. On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 5:39=E2=80=AFPM Ajit Khaparde wrote: > Hi Patrick, > When Manish was submitting his patchset, > Looks like because of a mail server message rate restriction, > only 31 of 57 patches went through in the first attempt > > He submitted the remaining patches 32 to 57 in second attempt. > > I created a bundle for the series now. [1] > > Also a couple of patches were stuck at the gate. > So a proper build has not happened on the patchset yet. [2] > Do we have a way to trigger a build on the bundle? > > Please advise. > > [1] https://patchwork.dpdk.org/bundle/ajitkhaparde/BNXT%2025.11/ > [2] https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/test-report/2025-October/921500.html > > Thanks > Ajit > > --000000000000901ec90641c75ce1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Ajit,

That sounds annoying. A sanity= check question to start - is there any sense in resubmitting the series an= d just intentionally delaying sending=C2=A0the 2nd half of the commits? I.e= .

1. git send-email /my-patches-dir/*
2.= Send the first 30
3. At prompt for 31st patch, pause.=C2=A0
4. wait 10 minutes.
5. Return to terminal, send patches 31 = through 57.

Or, if this is not possible, I think t= here should=C2=A0be some solution on the patchwork mail server policy=C2=A0= side. I think Ali Alnubani from NVIDIA manages it and he is usually pretty = responsive with such modification requests. We could ask about solutions li= ke:

1. Add a complete exception to the mail server= message rate restriction for emails coming from email addresses associated= with DPDK member companies.

or

2. Simply make the message rate restrictions more permissive than th= ey are currently (i.e. allow 100 emails, not 30).

= If the ideas above will not work, I will have to assess the "bundle&qu= ot; idea tomorrow when I have time available than I do right now. Most like= ly it's technically possible to facilitate=C2=A0but I do feel like simp= ly resolving the original issue (the mail server is not letting you submit = your series) and allowing the CI system automation to intake the patchserie= s from patchwork in the normal way is the ideal approach.

On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 5:39=E2=80=AFPM Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com> w= rote:
Hi Patrick,
When Manish was submitting his patchset,
Looks like because of= a mail server message rate restriction,
only 31 of 57 patches went through = in the first attempt

He submitted the remaining patches 32 to 57 in seco= nd attempt.

I created a bundle for the series now. [1]

Also a coupl= e of patches were stuck at the gate.
So a=C2=A0proper build has not happened= on the patchset yet. [2]
Do we have a way to trigger a build on the bundle?=
=
Please=C2=A0advise.

[1]=C2=A0https://patchwork.dpdk.= org/bundle/ajitkhaparde/BNXT%2025.11/
[2]=C2=A0h= ttps://mails.dpdk.org/archives/test-report/2025-October/921500.html

=
= Thanks
Ajit

--000000000000901ec90641c75ce1--