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 4A73CA04E7; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 18:03:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF0A32BF5; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 18:03:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-pj1-f65.google.com (mail-pj1-f65.google.com [209.85.216.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D07232BEA for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 18:02:58 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-pj1-f65.google.com with SMTP id h4so385129pjk.0 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 09:02:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Sz94oaXlFiWzPQsGcc9X2bAwmsIb9lTiNjIPi0ZqcBo=; b=Pr8vYpELGs+oHK97ro1Fg8kdBSLdA9tFTdIyfVHe01jk+1j6hyZV3tf3+zJ+nENE+e A5gCX2aYrlfvxVDWl9IKGE2tY/eCfBR6TrC/z+k5aKUMwi4OB1bpxlzvX8kO9kq/q074 mvXnUI/haeGmxtsHgMzxKimoa9Yu7V0HZlerEaMdNGITc5WB0jVfI0+L/p9s3fSdc+jt NSq5T8xOjZRJfMKg+yrRPJD8TlKhwe5USMjBRdPxl3z9BEu7ChJrcgtbrnVtLdqkRdqV 57beheAW7z21yTZFAnGXgRAwb91+9tAZbO4KmViNV07ZKDPTVYCLtNMXNEj2b77t7+zt 19+w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Sz94oaXlFiWzPQsGcc9X2bAwmsIb9lTiNjIPi0ZqcBo=; b=k/bEIgF+IVzXeARF0bROH0r/8COOMTBwgaSxVSjiQVyC+EJUyxYZy+5bN/flN7TD5q qjdT0Bi0bhAkKZLyqXU1uhLbSTmczY+mwSu4FLWAl+CuH9C4gNbNZmHfIUeZPyxmfuYx tFjKaruQryUpMnBzQhiSx2Whv7+558N9PbN6Tt75ms6vdkiv9bf325t0rsYiulY7JisG vDizGQPVnahi/td7xDwrZkSG5kDJoyS+Tf8wL8xaNBrJ8r9Tuyj0ObITB1j6cWMfjX+b aedTmctV2J7yT5bdQWajwUp4rbVl4kmQchQTBb7IshRVb/sVUTUNQDR1QNYDTdwgNiFn rU9w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533VuCwXAo9EOlAlD5c1ZTSxCgWedrH2/7OUWeiX7m8tYfuZQLG0 U2ZL3Ho8EjgYuOiY8oA4vbBk6Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyZoOXe96cAoys+NZ6xboyOLx+cMTj8NVf5bz67p3Cf5sRYTMHoKnMhlx5IxAIIwbh0kalNbQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7242:b029:d4:c719:79ce with SMTP id c2-20020a1709027242b02900d4c71979cemr3108200pll.26.1604595778036; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 09:02:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from hermes.local (204-195-22-127.wavecable.com. [204.195.22.127]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id lk13sm2487780pjb.43.2020.11.05.09.02.56 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 05 Nov 2020 09:02:57 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 09:02:46 -0800 From: Stephen Hemminger To: David Marchand Cc: dev , Luca Boccassi , Gaetan Rivet , Hemant Agrawal , Thomas Monjalon , "Yigit, Ferruh" , "Mcnamara, John" Message-ID: <20201105090246.334935c5@hermes.local> In-Reply-To: References: <20200922143202.8755-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20201024010146.27689-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/5] replace blacklist/whitelist with block/allow X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 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 Thu, 5 Nov 2020 09:27:59 +0100 David Marchand wrote: > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 3:02 AM Stephen Hemminger > wrote: > > > > This is a revised version of the earlier RFC patch set for changing > > the blacklist/whitelist terms in DPDK. > > > > The first patch is a duplicate from the other patch set about > > use of master/slave in API. > > > > Note: > > This may cause some warnings in existing programs in the CI > > tests using the -w flag. > > > > It also causes checkpatch complaints because we are replacing > > blacklist which is flagged by the current versions. > > > > v5 - rebase and fix conflicts in documentation > > > > Stephen Hemminger (5): > > eal: replace usage of blacklist/whitelist in enum > > drivers: replace references to blacklist > > eal: replace pci-whitelist/pci-blacklist options > > app/test: use new allowlist and blocklist > > doc: change references to blacklist and whitelist > > - This series does not implement what had been announced in the > deprecation notice: > https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/commit/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst?id=714e3e60014206cb616cd4157bf11a5209e7186f > > From my pov, the implementation with ALLOWED/BLOCKED is as good as the > one initially proposed so this is fine. > But in this case, please stick to it, there are still some traces > about "included" / "include" / "excluded" "exclude" devices, in > comments and usage strings. > Idem, please stick to a consistent wording in all patches, I noted > "Blocklisted" "Blocked" "Marked as blocked". Thanks fixed in next version > - The release note and deprecation notice (which is missing) must both > be updated atomically with the patches that change API. Should I just remove the deprecation notice now? > - Compilation is broken at patch1, since patch2 changes are required. The compilation does work just produces lots of warnings. > - The documentation patch has misses: > doc/guides/nics/fail_safe.rst: -w 81:00.0 -- -i > doc/guides/nics/fail_safe.rst: .//app/dpdk-testpmd -c > 0xff -n 4 -w ff:ff.f \ > doc/guides/sample_app_ug/vdpa.rst: -w > 0000:06:00.3,vdpa=1 -a 0000:06:00.4,vdpa=1 \ Fixed those > - The documentation patch has a rebase issue in ice.rst, as flow mark > devargs has been dropped in 62451c94ad - net/ice: remove devargs for > flow mark (7 weeks ago) Fixed that as well