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 5181143750; Thu, 21 Dec 2023 12:58:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15E9D4027D; Thu, 21 Dec 2023 12:58:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D372400D6 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2023 12:58:15 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1703159894; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=fCXj/1usrSxmxiOU5ymljoW+CIpmmF9jLXpXG3yHYlo=; b=Tg5Q3zT3DVVmAGkS2VjzdG88q5o/5r8chiz6o5mrcg+WI751TTRNT9VG8wG2SUQyiOWJdv eR0fQP/DO+9JSVygJmNGPwdLWKrQf8iM6V0f/98DdmVlWJAIO6zSyPye1aPujZwVz8FYPy 1Sbt4ZZaaX7rJObUmzbfO5R4C9Zg+CY= Received: from mail-lf1-f72.google.com (mail-lf1-f72.google.com [209.85.167.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-531-Kp98pT3iOtOgKxI1ddx1_A-1; Thu, 21 Dec 2023 06:58:11 -0500 X-MC-Unique: Kp98pT3iOtOgKxI1ddx1_A-1 Received: by mail-lf1-f72.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-50e186d2e54so362536e87.0 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2023 03:58:11 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1703159890; x=1703764690; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=fCXj/1usrSxmxiOU5ymljoW+CIpmmF9jLXpXG3yHYlo=; b=NA8zqP5h03p5KC7Ee0NNzGgz3YoLDfN+mkTAusYqAXvqYsIESqAY156h9umE0Ob+3J ogbflrpUoeso1jvJ7l5brzMdFyZDJVbHYljahwkbmIKNhaFf5fPm39p4yERF94z7uv1G Ah0kTk+haK9CyrPBp8HhT6auj2G1HiF7FcSUWIP6StDKQqycU71ggf6KeDMbIfSKJPpe j0uANnXWerIoR9lCx072zbt79NgCe3e+dzQkbDzz+Z+sAhA67w26l0Mhecif5nrhAccH 8l+H3KyW/FyDAUifyP2HpbEsuA29CVqxWQJC9whWcqMAPG3uRiI3k4t6YCjoXehXp/T8 sv4g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxNc7OP4eEJoKi+XZFjReMpYI66a3WhbkaacN29M5CApuMxj8H2 FZj6/M/tmTkozHA/E0/QH7C9mMZmqx2sxvdjOPKkFvJnt96hbLJ9bYjvFI1gEvjGVrfgkpDOMRE x2XchoYHYQXA+uiguqhZYffw3nBw= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:33d0:b0:50e:616e:f706 with SMTP id d16-20020a05651233d000b0050e616ef706mr413109lfg.3.1703159890129; Thu, 21 Dec 2023 03:58:10 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF37kLqJ0IuXxaNyoaZWKk9yQdL3Um7rf22lbwH6eM60dFoBKgWMOZy1oqOYS1aHWfurVh+OeEA636ZeEevxOA= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:33d0:b0:50e:616e:f706 with SMTP id d16-20020a05651233d000b0050e616ef706mr413094lfg.3.1703159889860; Thu, 21 Dec 2023 03:58:09 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20231215153946.2100669-1-mtahhan@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 12:57:58 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [v6] net/af_xdp: enable uds_path instead of use_cni To: Maryam Tahhan Cc: ferruh.yigit@amd.com, stephen@networkplumber.org, lihuisong@huawei.com, fengchengwen@huawei.com, liuyonglong@huawei.com, shibin.koikkara.reeny@intel.com, ciara.loftus@intel.com, dev@dpdk.org X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 12:46=E2=80=AFPM Maryam Tahhan = wrote: > > If there are fixes mixed in, please separate them in dedicated patches > > so we can backport them to LTS releases. > > Thanks for the Feedback David, I don't quite understand the ask here, is = to to have a separate patch for documentation to fixes? As previous feedbac= k in the mailing list was to keep the documentation changes with the fix. > > There is one fix in this patchset (for for broken socket behaviour). The = rest of the changes were fixing up all the documentation. So do I need to c= reate a patchset with multiple patches, one for the c code and separate one= s for the documentation? Ideally yes. If the documentation fix relates to the code fix, it shall go as one patch. Otherwise the doc fix can go as a separate patch. And then after those fixes, the last patch of the series would be your enhancement change. Thanks. --=20 David Marchand