From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <thomas@monjalon.net> Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B5C5DED; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 11:47:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id CACD621F59; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 06:47:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 29 Oct 2018 06:47:01 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=TQ3P9cEbGJFH6tlOmESb5DXa/si8LC5nanYT4LGG1xs=; b=Ipg6zRERkveR RLN4ZBFwNLqq2jcNHZ8hqJPRewDDcVSsJy+xcu1frKGzxEs58Eus8x53nccFNZF0 sZwxXPoJ8HwHH7dkQuD42wdhANH7XIUa6doDpCYIx+/vN4pXqLRVcQHPoN72q9Uo St8l1Ffwa357csMslDYYa+D3SWQYUDk= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=TQ3P9cEbGJFH6tlOmESb5DXa/si8LC5nanYT4LGG1 xs=; b=ejKK6ix6ke34lSU/BVulA4v7r2VbNmBEUvmvdTkwVtf+PVr76mkyJl2vJ gK2WI5HhPSLlbiXFOl4C0gyrLvNA1jWg9lvEa4snvmDudlzCoJa0vvnsKyc4hx6I 05IS0ewYVYAEEwciPWf2bCaknDhGrH9VE5nlvmvQWMLKPLY/sWptfvPr0d/PO9B4 8A33FSTuz/1fw62h61HscuaCbx4MSS8ozGw6+1kEKpIBi/6zI+6OywssIltPhMWT iklM4kkpolGJJme4H/thumZfm+WQ0VR2M416CXiYqz89IGSa0zKnoVrlkC/GkccY 5IamL5k3NRc5B2vfCA4UqLdnXdl6A== X-ME-Sender: <xms:JOXWW1nEWWEzlro3ljAuyl1oZPcnUxvEq7mnGLrYbF-2CrCDnCxZjA> X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:JOXWW-2VopHcHUVDdkseix8vuLCTDqzkmVcS_LqP6tseYgO4RJS8Vg> <xmx:JOXWW2fXU1l-caDyU3xHeaLQfRHvJsbXdoGX3UBsPBJF27y0GgCEMg> <xmx:JOXWW3EnWlwu4Rt6l842b_ZeCLH0bKOFdehWOUxl0G6T5yFZhvq9uA> <xmx:JOXWW_3jEE-5PWuP1ANFLOyqUvNag1gC7_hfCNl1Z0isixRn-0zlaQ> <xmx:JOXWW_mK4-8sMXt-BGDHkOk1500z3YVHG9DmnCzXetgHy_Jq8AjDuw> <xmx:JeXWWyZKaK6TrsNLIo5anmu7bfLuknmcj_aAYbfaqz5u0Agph7NJ9Q> Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 8C9FDE4893; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 06:46:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> To: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>, "Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)" <Gavin.Hu@arm.com> Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>, "stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>, Ola Liljedahl <Ola.Liljedahl@arm.com>, "olivier.matz@6wind.com" <olivier.matz@6wind.com>, "chaozhu@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <chaozhu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, "bruce.richardson@intel.com" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, "konstantin.ananyev@intel.com" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 11:47:05 +0100 Message-ID: <3665103.RQOKKVgJhj@xps> In-Reply-To: <20181029101612.GA4738@jerin> References: <1537172244-64874-2-git-send-email-gavin.hu@arm.com> <VI1PR08MB316781C8FE59C58537A122868FF30@VI1PR08MB3167.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <20181029101612.GA4738@jerin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] ring: synchronize the load and store of the tail X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:47:02 -0000 29/10/2018 11:16, Jerin Jacob: > From: "Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)" <Gavin.Hu@arm.com> > > > > Hi Thomas and Jerin, > > > > The patches were extensively reviewed by Arm internally, as the 1st patch was not able to be concluded, I created a new patch series(2 patches). > > How can I clean up this mess? > > 1. make all the previous patches Superseded? > > 2. We have two more new patches, should I submit the 4 patches (the old 2 patches + 2 new patches) with V2? > > I would suggest to supersede the old patches(not in this case, in any case when you > send new version and update the version number). Why not in this case? There are some old patches in patchwork which should be superseded. > I would suggest send new patches as separate series. If it has dependency on > exiting Acked patches please mention that in cover letter. I would suggest also to stop top-posting, it doesn't help reading threads. > > From: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com> > > > From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> > > > > 27/10/2018 17:00, Jerin Jacob: > > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> > > > > > > 17/10/2018 08:35, Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China): > > > > > > > Hi Jerin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As the 1st one of the 3-patch set was not concluded, I submit this 2- > > > patch series to unblock the merge. > > > > > > > > > > > > The thread is totally messed up because: > > > > > > - there is no cover letter > > > > > > - some different series (testpmd, i40e and doc) are in the same > > > thread > > > > > > - v4 replies to a different series > > > > > > - this version should be a v5 but has no number > > > > > > - this version replies to the v3 > > > > > > - patchwork still shows v3 and "v5" > > > > > > - replies from Ola are not quoting previous discussion > > > > > > > > > > > > Because of all of this, it is really difficult to follow. > > > > > > This is probably the reason of the lack of review outside of Arm. > > > > > > > > > > > > One more issue: you must Cc the relevant maintainers. > > > > > > Here: > > > > > > - Olivier for rte_ring > > > > > > - Chao for IBM platform > > > > > > - Bruce and Konstantin for x86 > > > > > > > > > > > > Guys, it is really cool to have more Arm developpers in DPDK. > > > > > > But please consider better formatting your discussions, it is > > > > > > really important in our contribution workflow. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't know what to do. > > > > > > I suggest to wait for more feedbacks and integrate it in -rc2. > > > > > > > > > > This series has been acked and tested. Sure, if we are looking for > > > > > some more feedback we can push to -rc2 if not it a good candidate to > > > > > be selected for -rc1. > > > > > > > > It has been acked and tested only for Arm platforms. > > > > And Olivier, the ring maintainer, was not Cc. > > > > > > > > I feel it is not enough. > > > > > > Sure, More reviews is already better. But lets keep as -rc2 target. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.