From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 554C56CA1 for ; Mon, 9 May 2016 17:58:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 May 2016 08:58:06 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.24,601,1455004800"; d="scan'208";a="699230522" Received: from yliu-dev.sh.intel.com (HELO yliu-dev) ([10.239.67.162]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 May 2016 08:58:05 -0700 Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 09:02:39 -0700 From: Yuanhan Liu To: "Xie, Huawei" Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Message-ID: <20160509160239.GA5641@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> References: <1462323027-91942-1-git-send-email-huawei.xie@intel.com> <20160505000327.GT5641@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <20160505030704.GU5641@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <20160505035000.GY5641@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <20160509051438.GZ5641@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] virtio: split virtio rx/tx queue X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 May 2016 15:58:07 -0000 On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 05:44:03AM +0000, Xie, Huawei wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Yuanhan Liu [mailto:yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com] > > Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 1:15 PM > > To: Xie, Huawei > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] virtio: split virtio rx/tx queue > > > > On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 05:29:27AM +0000, Xie, Huawei wrote: > > > What I mean is firstly we split the queue, without breaking the common > > > setup; then introduce RX/TX specific setup calling extracted common > > > setup, so we don't have a chance to introduce duplicated code. > > > > In such way, you have actually introduced duplicated code, haven't you? > > You may argue, "yes, but I will fix it in a later patch." This is to > > introducing a build error and fixing it later to me. > > > > Yuanhan, I don't see how hard it is to understand this. Duplicated code isn't introduced. I will send the patch later. Good. I just want to make sure no duplicated code is introduced. --yliu