From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43554A04B5; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 20:01:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 066FE100C; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 20:00:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2484DF64 for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 20:00:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D8AB5C00AB; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:00:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 06 Nov 2020 14:00:56 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm2; bh= s2h2e6nifIVN9Wd8YU2EEpHvEDpTAIdjZ68aLL2YEnE=; b=YJbuOTc5+aK8QM+k Ku5u0gJiOTMpI7X4RzfGK4bMSx4yXe8SUcMRo399c84PvMCKmosUEaNj4d+9e9Tj qSre6EPfKavPfKA2o7P/RbwJXPpEbR5xerXs3h4vQWZdj40gUg32KfrwY0M6J5SV crtcpXGWZIjfA8Jz2S4le6O516ipd/6r9SfXg0w4xlUptziUO1j0oxlZ/fwwvtPW +xkusNUrket+yyLN+9vlygJkzB8Hro0dXwXfKkbiqa+zYS86EHjcc6NWtqhtlYJb rfnUEfbTZJh+FHSgKe7c0ONcldCsfR+9eGMc1JzYYt2/FEFa1b7YticooPs2ht3+ PxRvng== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=s2h2e6nifIVN9Wd8YU2EEpHvEDpTAIdjZ68aLL2YE nE=; b=OaRo9/FK96PcgYoUkiffgD3SHki2pME+ltjAf3ap1+fhamKmKPk7tA/aP 8GRwVskIZfzyddV2Q3qTvl5RZZpIdzdTedO5gKi//JQLf7K+3oyqTmvb4y0ASW4l qwPjsMrfXe9N+fAsWX4JlFvwyXgzIA+fbPXHDeXaagAcdAD764VjfSy5hytNDDwW gHw0v7z8AMZ5GOqVaLxzZGH3M5EeWZpMv811aLpwbeTartkECS7Rt4+WEG7DYE5p ukdPdrECGCsFdcm8p8BCPwY4P/hNQXPoBW2bLyq9MBl5t2+KfxfOIfODWalDMniL o39amjvOBav9XZY9qD4WW3N7z9n8w== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedruddtledguddvvdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdej ueeiiedvffegheenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrh fuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgr lhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 9D4653060067; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:00:54 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Honnappa Nagarahalli Cc: 'Ferruh Yigit' , Jiawen Wu , "dev@dpdk.org" , "david.marchand@redhat.com" , "konstantin.ananyev@intel.com" , nd Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2020 20:00:53 +0100 Message-ID: <1638514.6lRH5zx6jk@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20201019085415.82207-1-jiawenwu@trustnetic.com> <3558935.noZgFSCOjD@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 00/58] net: txgbe PMD 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" 06/11/2020 19:21, Honnappa Nagarahalli: > > 05/11/2020 09:55, Jiawen Wu: > > > On Thursday, November 5, 2020 9:55 AM, Jiawen Wu wrote: > > > > On Thursday, November 5, 2020 1:24 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > > > > On 11/3/2020 11:08 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > > > When pulling in the main branch, I see some checkpatches > > > > > > warnings (in order of criticality): > > > > > > Using rte_smp_[r/w]mb > > > > > > Using rte_panic/rte_exit > > > > > > Using compiler attribute directly > > > > > > > > > > > > Please could you fix them (at least first two) before the second series? > > Thomas, IMO, these should result in errors in checkpatch, not just warnings. > Do you see any issues? The problem is that there are too many false positives in checkpatch.