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 2FA22A0526; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 05:02:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6D20C940; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 05:02:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com (szxga05-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.191]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23187C93C for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 05:02:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from DGGEMS413-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4CgnJh5h0DzhfYs; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:01:56 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.61.240] (10.174.61.240) by DGGEMS413-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.213) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.487.0; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:02:05 +0800 To: Ferruh Yigit , "dev@dpdk.org" , Thomas Monjalon , Andrew Rybchenko CC: "bluca@debian.org" , "Wangxiaoyun (Cloud)" , Luoxianjun , "Yinshi (Stone)" , luojiachen , "Chenlizhong (IT Chip)" , "Zhaohui (zhaohui, Cloud Infrastructure Service Product Dept.)" , chenchanghu References: From: Guoyang Zhou Message-ID: <4d201ad2-14e8-e529-4f89-443fef2583dc@huawei.com> Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:02:04 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.174.61.240] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 0/2] remove some limitations and operations 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" Hi ferruh, I hope that these two patches can be applied. Because in that way, the version can be stable. Thanks, Guoyang zhou 在 2020/11/24 17:31, Ferruh Yigit 写道: > On 11/23/2020 4:09 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: >> On 11/23/2020 1:12 PM, Guoyang Zhou wrote: >>> The maximum number of queues on the chip can be any value greater >>> than 0, it does not have to be the power of two, and remove the >>> operation of optical modules in the link function. >>> >>> -- >>> v1: >>>    - remove the limitation for max queue num >>>    - remove the operation of optical modules in the link function >>> >>> Guoyang Zhou (2): >>>    net/hinic/base: remove the limitation for max queue num >>>    net/hinic: remove the operation of optical modules >>> >> >> Hi Guoyang, >> >> How critical is this set, can you please describe the impact of the fixes? >> >> If they are not critical, let's postpone them to next release, since the release >> is a few days away. >> > > Hi Guoyang, > > I can see that a v2 has been sent but it is still not clear if you are OK to > defer the patches, can you please share your thoughts on it? > > Thanks, > ferruh > >> btw, both patches has [1] as a fixed patch, but that patch looks unrelated with >> both, that patch only cleans up the uninit/destroy path. >> Can you please elaborate why that patch is fixed? >> >> As far as I can see the condition removed in first patch introduced in v19.08 >> ([2]) and the calls in second patch added in v19.11 ([3]). >> >> >> >> [1] >> Fixes: 511b7371d32b ("net/hinic: fix hugepage memory leaks") >> >> >> [2] >> Fixes: 828d3e15a9dc ("net/hinic/base: support context and work queue") >> >> [3] >> Fixes: 54ac33869932 ("net/hinic: set link down and up") >