From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f54.google.com (mail-wm0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D7FA2A6C for ; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 18:36:14 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f54.google.com with SMTP id a4so219888277wme.1 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 09:36:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-type; bh=FJueVVWnDw5SZqqJh6mMhvJMyTMi04rRII00r01NIeU=; b=JaWzQHCpNlx5P+ldAicnqTwQXhyCBQ+4fONJVPyq0yiiE6XsIf88zd/D0x+hUy83MY MknKnxu3yf4cksTNv69yvvc41FFpVWogayP90qUrD6BCwR2OuZb7duDCaPlwwgQVnojh zat5ty6J/2IjEXdwZkqL7g6qAvbGx9sMP6PvH3Nurl50FYQdbPfvDM8tyFsT5r+c6prP kzdYBzhOWQQZuQl+9+atNU4KVy/4QqqI9CR/X3iLw43N+BqpcqqCWaGK7KHAyT04jNZj Iu6/bk0whMaqV2WfumzJu1Gdkq6KcFBvwkC7i34Mo4XyXe/62lZB6aPnbAnAp2LzhrSv RCaQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-type; bh=FJueVVWnDw5SZqqJh6mMhvJMyTMi04rRII00r01NIeU=; b=W1ioy7Jx6ghHO65fFlBnkWX+qoHtn9sAiqlcAXrU+zjbj/m8QYeOBcDWLvwclCfb3D bHIZzvjjNSxg8A7lSqr1Bud43LjBZlSaz0+14FrcINeBQEJua51X1tUJsqYzJYECd3Bo pbAEWXKkzFFfqJfHghVwSWw740BtrmBtrHgQ9vdLqfTCF33qAh4fMFVaE9RIF8tSu34H MJre3Ge9aXgKeU1l7EDCMitkXocIE9t6gbhV9YFFjhsGRye3EffLstdDKuG29T/4cBEQ rniG8/XFzfPdVaawQiD6A5iI1HM/oIP6W4Z3TdN1m0H/Rw8It1Yxclsl5OdWIKpOJyt1 /c7A== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQ4KX/9z+rIKyB89AVJ7A9HUKlLj5FFh0I8IbIBtqiRgHYFTdsC8W9YQ5Jv7neEhO5D X-Received: by 10.194.63.144 with SMTP id g16mr41776481wjs.149.1456248974226; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 09:36:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps13.localnet (171.36.101.84.rev.sfr.net. [84.101.36.171]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id hm9sm30750701wjb.34.2016.02.23.09.36.12 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 23 Feb 2016 09:36:13 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Kobylinski, MichalX" , bruce.richardson@intel.com Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 18:34:38 +0100 Message-ID: <1565638.IGO4Cj2mt5@xps13> Organization: 6WIND User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.1.6-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <987EE72691933347B9F0B5C19E71B5BB1F02E312@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <987EE72691933347B9F0B5C19E71B5BB1F02E312@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Question about patchset order. X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 17:36:14 -0000 2016-02-23 16:17, Kobylinski, MichalX: > Hi Thomas, > I sent in January a patch-set that extends to 24 bits a next_hop field in lpm library: > http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/10249/ > http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/10250/ > > also Jerin Jakob sent his patch-set with ARM architecture support in lpm library. > http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/10478/ > http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/10479/ > http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/10480/ > > Could you write please, in which order do you prefer to apply these two patch-sets? > This information will be helpful to predict the risk and estimate additional work. Thanks for bringing up the LPM patches. I would prefer to follow the advice of Bruce who has well followed these interactions.