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 41F81A00C2; Sun, 6 Mar 2022 18:56:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACAE84068F; Sun, 6 Mar 2022 18:56:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 649344067B; Sun, 6 Mar 2022 18:56:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0A9D5C0163; Sun, 6 Mar 2022 12:56:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 06 Mar 2022 12:56:31 -0500 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; bh=1WOawrqQY4jew2 JINSBVcmbcbyYTcX+7C2GFIBLZozE=; b=e1DOj/Y1RSgK0xkgs/7V4XiHyTmzlD znFLw5Yf4i3Likz7/q4Fr3oPOMhuDDFaBKUYaCxpgEe4yI7SmmzczS93xHvQnbB8 6yzJ+K1iRutV/qdkDVNK9+iX9mxuMZX3/EIHphNtSIWzY7cNIrL3DDHjoqzyprqx zLOpS67Wh2bGIdz9ZbwfSnAaJWDNQefv2hgjaMyLEj/qaeesTpDSRKMOqfyqDdjY ZL0XwXXxjhVcaXqTRqa2vATGBLXBw3VppiOQYHpeGj5neeLswIT0fwYZUl0IJGTx 0amdVOt5eV2ZnzD+XFe/iTqw23xVUkd6u/ObiAW36IE5rX7Eovpndm+Q== 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=fm2; bh=1WOawrqQY4jew2JINSBVcmbcbyYTcX+7C2GFIBLZo zE=; b=QS8yumjDf4DD7N0ZYTsO89fnfVgtNMAc+fO5SUaLuqYldkEZfZcBmoUlY GTd6rqoKcsV1NSkk8XAvu/WomYbUgp5E3fletfemFaqAYUbvSiteI0JMsG45b2dO UdGIMseE0+yrt9K7X/KRKYi6RFjbvqmt2kZKf4rZ2rWvbyzZtrWTreCCLsmGULMR QvUyvduo0nK2lyoDM8JJtZyuWn0JhKZBa7LXYx1ChKgBn0ESEV7Xu28mMQD/eNGZ YoK3R1g8ptiPC2w23ysh5An7gh4o/j9Vy2AerilNyDNpfXArg49PkzFiPaANzQ1s zWRKiqCInSy/Lca/QQkLstw7MwdkA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvvddrudduvddguddtlecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdej ueeiiedvffegheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfh hrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sun, 6 Mar 2022 12:56:30 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Wang, Haiyue" , "Zhang, Qi Z" , ferruh.yigit@intel.com Cc: "Daly, Jeff" , "dev@dpdk.org" , stable@dpdk.org, Stephen Douthit , "Lu, Wenzhuo" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] net/ixgbe: Fix ixgbe_is_sfp() to return valid result for X550EM_a devs Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2022 18:56:28 +0100 Message-ID: <8453140.K2JlShyGXD@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20211206221922.644187-1-stephend@silicom-usa.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 01/03/2022 12:18, Zhang, Qi Z: > From: Wang, Haiyue > > From: Jeff Daly > > > From: Stephen Douthit > > > > > > Currently all X500EM* MAC types fallthrough to the default case and > > > get reported as non-SFP regardless of media type, which isn't correct. > > > > > > Fixes: 0790adeb567 ("ixgbe/base: support X550em_a device") > > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Douthit > > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Daly > > > > Acked-by: Haiyue Wang > > Applied to dpdk-next-net-intel after renaming the title to "fix FSP check for X550EM devices" to fix check-git-log error. It seems you have applied only the first patch of the series. Why? Is there a good reason to split a series without any justification? What about the two other patches?