From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 927D91DBF for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 10:08:51 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Mar 2018 01:08:50 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,426,1515484800"; d="scan'208";a="179940424" Received: from mmorgan-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.252.7.229]) ([10.252.7.229]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 05 Mar 2018 01:08:45 -0800 To: Andrew Rybchenko , dev@dpdk.org Cc: Thomas Monjalon , keith.wiles@intel.com, jianfeng.tan@intel.com, andras.kovacs@ericsson.com, laszlo.vadkeri@ericsson.com, benjamin.walker@intel.com, bruce.richardson@intel.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, kuralamudhan.ramakrishnan@intel.com, louise.m.daly@intel.com, nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com, yskoh@mellanox.com, pepperjo@japf.ch, jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com, hemant.agrawal@nxp.com, olivier.matz@6wind.com References: <405c4b97-4561-6ef7-5844-fdc0cdfaabc5@solarflare.com> From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Message-ID: <28a175c1-b306-ec7b-e69b-003b40968d2e@intel.com> Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 09:08:43 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <405c4b97-4561-6ef7-5844-fdc0cdfaabc5@solarflare.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 31/41] ethdev: use contiguous allocation for DMA memory 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 09:08:52 -0000 On 03-Mar-18 2:05 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: > On 03/03/2018 04:46 PM, Anatoly Burakov wrote: >> This fixes the following drivers in one go: > > Does it mean that these drivers are broken in the middle of patch set > and fixed now? > If so, it would be good to avoid it. It breaks bisect. > Depends on the definition of "broken". Legacy memory mode will still work for all drivers throughout the patchset. As for new memory mode, yes, it will be "broken in the middle of the patchset", but due to the fact that there's enormous amount of code to review between fbarray changes, malloc changes, contiguous allocation changes and adding new rte_memzone API's, i favored ease of code review over bisect. I can of course reorder and roll up several different patchset and all driver updates into one giant patch, but do you really want to be the one reviewing such a patch? -- Thanks, Anatoly