From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ua0-f194.google.com (mail-ua0-f194.google.com [209.85.217.194]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3752A108F for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:00:25 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-ua0-f194.google.com with SMTP id 96so16328102uaq.2 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 06:00:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nfware-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=uHOF7IbphIy4cqx6VEJcezx5TpCflSjSj8q3z94CBm4=; b=W6Ck2JrqnDcJTJO7742xKK1su2N/JItWlyDXgCrPU5oPC+/btXMphavaEuLkE88Kve RfC8ciI3Bkk8GaA+e4yu/3nzxNUalxNiQpvqLwqWe7+J0E623ZwGeXNr4zOa9MEMxWXY /Son6mMpVmYlLzRZQk4uwZgDEMN8yvmcyMmfP3aD2j9k3Z5KlKyIjidSSOEpwJNJmyQK cT5DwFI4ypK28xjwg63f27YIjG3Ywqa9YL0HuoJ7R3FrFpBIGbtw6R1zeH1DgdyPfesz M5Kjd0Rp95fQ1bY9Uz6dNQbxr8ASf+FYEuWOLILniY9XLjYjFrL9R1+u8SEBKwVHs6dd ceCg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=uHOF7IbphIy4cqx6VEJcezx5TpCflSjSj8q3z94CBm4=; b=mgaN4Md0l+5Y/d4MiIXY1GrMKNepLe5o6cIyPf9gqlMmcqiz/QIHN3YgwGql/50HrC 4J2aruXlnVw77cjSp4Z05yNm4Y3FOj4D1N86xAcVXDQo26afibpdYigxnmSFrLGb5M63 q+P+F7fuRDAXLGaPfEYaV2+ZhVqtyKvJZ5GW5db+POCcO9/OJxuZWBWNSQJ4ehJ8sSOs GCvS4nO6YoAN2LRBYEBd29/WjsYSP9XYswhbUn+oEJOF2N/vW5LkZJlYq0zPA4wNYais lnTp+eDItybEWzkdE2VMIz2pX30FpMqp6Na/MkR131xcWdwQy5QWgkVUsKGHdl7UIW8+ ttow== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXIZHNkhtO+CMrORfASOMHeMCwAMPhaDiTi7bMC6dRh3V9JlZAnGNoZVwabDAOO1RwSVhg7Trw9q2vF0Qg== X-Received: by 10.176.3.236 with SMTP id 99mr14848073uau.96.1485266424391; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 06:00:24 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.159.35.80 with HTTP; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 06:00:24 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [95.182.74.2] In-Reply-To: <5cd19f6a-311c-b0fe-5d6c-ee757ac2e86e@intel.com> References: <20170123235020.19641-1-jonshin@cisco.com> <20170124022145.7540-1-jonshin@cisco.com> <5cd19f6a-311c-b0fe-5d6c-ee757ac2e86e@intel.com> From: Igor Ryzhov Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 17:00:24 +0300 Message-ID: To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: Steve Shin , "dev@dpdk.org" , Thomas Monjalon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] ethdev: fix MAC address replay 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: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:00:25 -0000 Hello Ferruh, Thanks for the explanation. I tried to find something like that in "Contribution Guidelines" and found that both "Acked-by" and "Reviewed-by" are just mentioned but not explained. Meaning of these sentences can be different in different projects so it can be good to explain it in DPDK development guidelines. Best regards, Igor On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 4:21 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 1/24/2017 10:09 AM, Igor Ryzhov wrote: > > Thank you Steve. > > > > > I never did it before and I don't know if I have rights for that, but: > > > > Acked-by: Igor Ryzhov > > > Unrelated to the patch itself, but since it has been mentioned, let me > share what I know, I believe Thomas or others will correct me if I am > wrong: > > - Everyone can Ack. > And this is useful information for maintainers, so it is something > good when more people review and ack. Please do. > > - Multiple ack or review is better. > > - But each Ack does not have same weight, maintainer decides on this > weight, based on contribution of the person who ack'ed. > > - There is slight difference between Acked-by and Reviewed-by: > > -- Acked-by: Kind of asking for patch to be applied, saying this patch > is good and please get it. > > -- Reviewed-by: Saying I have done the review at my best and patch looks > good to me. > > Acked-by has slightly more responsibility than Reviewed-by. > > If you are not maintainer of that field, and not have strong opinion > about that patch to be merged, it is possible to prefer Reviewed-by > against Acked-by. > > But overall both are good, and definitely better than not saying > anything at all. > > Thanks, > ferruh > > > > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Steve Shin > > wrote: > > > > This patch fixes a bug in replaying MAC address to the hardware > > in rte_eth_dev_config_restore() routine. Added default MAC replay as > > well. > > > > Fixes: 4bdefaade6d1 ("ethdev: VMDQ enhancements") > > > > --- > > v2: Added default MAC replay & Code optimization > > v3: Covered a case (ex, SR-IOV) where multiple pools > > exist in the mac_pool_sel array. > > v4: removed a coding style warning > > > > Signed-off-by: Steve Shin jonshin@cisco.com>> > > > >