Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] fix void function returning a value

[Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>]

On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 02:03:29PM +0100, David Marchand wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 1:46 PM Bruce Richardson
> <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 01:23:15PM +0100, David Marchand wrote:
> > > Hello Bruce,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:21 PM Andre Muezerie
> > > <andremue@linux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > v2:
> > > >  * Updated commit messages to follow standard format.
> > > >
> > > > This patch avoids warnings like the one below emitted by MSVC, and is
> > > > needed to get the code to compile cleanly with MSVC.
> > > >
> > > > ../drivers/common/idpf/idpf_common_rxtx_avx512.c(139):
> > > >     warning C4098: 'idpf_singleq_rearm':
> > > >     'void' function returning a value
> > > >
> > > > Andre Muezerie (2):
> > > >   drivers/common: fix void function returning a value
> > > >   drivers/net: fix void function returning a value
> > > >
> > > >  drivers/common/idpf/idpf_common_rxtx_avx512.c | 12 ++++++++----
> > > >  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_avx2.c         |  2 +-
> > > >  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_avx512.c       |  2 +-
> > > >  drivers/net/iavf/iavf_rxtx_vec_avx2.c         |  2 +-
> > > >  drivers/net/ice/ice_rxtx_vec_avx2.c           |  2 +-
> > > >  5 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > I see the series is delegated to the main repo (Thomas).
> > >
> > > This touches only Intel drivers and the code deduplication effort you
> > > started may conflict (though trivially) with such changes depending on
> > > when it lands.
> > >
> > > Would you mind merging this fixes from Andre through the
> > > next-net-intel tree, right now?
> > > If so, please mark it as delegated to you in patchwork.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > Hi David,
> >
> > the code deduplication effort patchsets are similarly delegated to the main
> > repo. I was assuming this was deliberate, but perhaps it isn't? I'm ok to
> 
> I suspect it was delegated to main because of the change on
> devtools/check-git-log.sh.
> But it is really only about net driver changes, so it should go either
> through your or Stephen tree.
> (we have enough patches waiting in main ;-))
> 

I'm ok to take it in my tree, unless Stephen would rather in his tree.

> 
> > take these patches in next-net-intel, but just would like to confirm that
> > neither you, Thomas or Stephen (as net maintainer) want to review the dedup
> > work ahead of that initial merge?
> 
> I don't have an objection on this series (on the contrary, I am quite
> happy to see such effort).
> I'll have a deeper look at it, this afternoon.
> 

Thanks.

I'm having it[1] reviewed internally, but I'd appreciate even a cursory
review, especially at the new directory layout and build implications, from
the higher-level directory maintainers.

/Bruce

[1] https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=34398