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 5907CA0093; Tue, 10 May 2022 16:44:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1BF7410F2; Tue, 10 May 2022 16:44:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1DF2410EE for ; Tue, 10 May 2022 16:44:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F81F5C009A; Tue, 10 May 2022 10:44:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 10 May 2022 10:44:21 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1652193861; x= 1652280261; bh=14u6VidFEaOStp+Vq7sMcX6nvBzivXagkhJaESdsXW8=; b=G scf+LgySDuz20TBjdapmfuRp4nPLFIxx2jzNmXMlbII4OceFLi5LV8Vf6Sbri+xC i0lnFp75gC3aJd2zqP3T2BTpRFi3NOoSAD8hRqreLHAUh0u20K5umIAGK4w/eJ/R CZA32Ts1OVb9+oAI0WSuIEGSUcmtdUz8qS+FN37QoWRqSfm4DUG8qBuPgh2dTuBf vpFnvno5N6n173BAA4JH3OIzQKSUaBKu4UxFLIcYBQ+WkoSrStCKPz9Er3D6yXaS CCjsx5Vq9FVrPgZGzQitHN7Csry4J8C41nWcMAF40LS1U3p2PAT3OHokoWEnCK7q 2Xgpn5k+ECCrr0SkuMNHg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject :subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1652193861; x=1652280261; bh=14u6VidFEaOSt p+Vq7sMcX6nvBzivXagkhJaESdsXW8=; b=cK0kx7bc+cxUezYqypWrLvgECYyGV DclxOtalAWzE7KtWIYOePkwWZP5cNvLA9T/rW+VSXelum6J/z9iwyr+mA0fybmKN c8W7i4EC/AkeeG0goujudsCHdWcDyRL+0ZaTLNGApIJE3p/WMD/BeGoBaeeJ7CQN 2/l2HEnxBKVrVkZsCOUNaGdNG5ADl/sQmpKgHwiqHV7bfWrT5hJCNwSZozDLUAK0 kQu7VOBJnFa12NkDJjJRB/ILRTzwu5oR0cCWpRPr/WZ7vQ3qISWpOx/yaLaHwpTS 2Lv7yb1QNtNwxgvqRR0TlcDmhDUoZSZ0bQi8UrO2RsdZX6vWApAQwrkng== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrgedugdejiecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvfevufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnheptdejieeifeehtdffgfdvleetueeffeehueejgfeuteeftddtieek gfekudehtdfgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrh homhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 10 May 2022 10:44:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Chautru, Nicolas" , Tom Rix Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "gakhil@marvell.com" , "Kinsella, Ray" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" , "Zhang, Mingshan" , "david.marchand@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] baseband/acc100: add protection for some negative scenario Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 16:44:18 +0200 Message-ID: <3160467.oiGErgHkdL@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <1651083423-33202-1-git-send-email-nicolas.chautru@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org 10/05/2022 14:11, Tom Rix: > On 5/9/22 2:45 PM, Chautru, Nicolas wrote: > > From: Tom Rix > >> On 4/27/22 11:17 AM, Nicolas Chautru wrote: > >>> Catch exception in PMD in case of invalid input parameter. > >> It is not clear if this is 1 fix or 2. > >> > >> But it does look like an acc100 fix so it should be split from the > >> acc101 patchset. > >> > > What is the concern? This is a different commit related to acc100. > > Bisecting patchsets. > > A patchset like this that enables a new device should just enable the > new device. > > Not enable a new device and random other stuff. > > If the patchset had to be reverted, the revert would wipe out the fixes. > > That work is done by someone else without deep knowledge or time to > analyze every patchset for misc parts. > > The fixes are more important than the new device, so they should be > submitted first. Well explained, and I agree with Tom.