From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D82BA0096 for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 18:56:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BF501BC03; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 18:56:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61A7B1BB32 for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 18:56:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CA833082207; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 16:56:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.112.59] (ovpn-112-59.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.59]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4354C5B683; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 16:56:02 +0000 (UTC) To: Leyi Rong , qi.z.zhang@intel.com Cc: dev@dpdk.org References: <20190604054248.68510-1-leyi.rong@intel.com> From: Maxime Coquelin Message-ID: Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 18:56:00 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190604054248.68510-1-leyi.rong@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.47]); Tue, 04 Jun 2019 16:56:08 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 00/49] shared code update 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 Leyi, On 6/4/19 7:41 AM, Leyi Rong wrote: > Main changes: > 1. Advanced switch rule support. > 2. Add more APIs for tunnel management. > 3. Add some minor features. > 4. Code clean and bug fix. In order to ease the review process, I think it would be much better to split this series in multiple ones, by features. Otherwise, it is more difficult to keep track if comments are taken into account in the next revision. Also, it is suggested to put the fixes first in the series to ease the backporting. Thanks, Maxime