From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B2202674 for ; Wed, 26 Dec 2018 22:33:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F1921323; Wed, 26 Dec 2018 16:33:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 26 Dec 2018 16:33:46 -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=mesmtp; bh=KyYpG0Wi//oYi6V7TQvU8pi7W9ye06iKMq3A+NmM3os=; b=pgl1nc61lbS+ qcGusXAUtWqV947TSqVNapGv3GlDWhvKpSezsbtZzKhT7FDoApmiMoDj/v6hkHPE wITyEuipBJgcrQarbmC67uXjjxYSRoOoOAasKeFnfZ8twvrCxA64JARKWJpOPTDM rOSkY0JWvbbIy/t5VfeVrmt3NX/a6B0= 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=KyYpG0Wi//oYi6V7TQvU8pi7W9ye06iKMq3A+NmM3 os=; b=BhlOXxssC1eUmna24DIxX5Y71P7Vwv7S3J7wQHbc+qJd2xDSGx7hyPgiP 9WUFsHeeRhGOtyIL0j0qkJnwcStX9KUKFX2nBg3ZVDUdsIFJ85p4QQkh6mkvLPsQ Kx/EWQcVh0Ok54Y2AEatJcrOwc6c/+KIaZpdxa9J9YyVY0MVvNrIsTqNiZOB4oSi h63QijWNIHbtyGilRGzkdrpq2cize77abF1VeOA5qqvhRWuQTeNAKdAEPgZUTysB a2jSG6TthAuClmrVj2GP8HE8ua/5kaVUyCc90ACe6miIC8XK7v/oOJPLbKAMG3EK qAelQlrwXQlqczef6RAZD0JjPo3xg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtledrtddtgdduvdelucdltddurdegtdekrddttd dmucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfquhht necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc fkphepkeeirddvvddurdduvdefrdeiieenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhh ohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (apoitiers-658-1-60-66.w86-221.abo.wanadoo.fr [86.221.123.66]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7DC60100BA; Wed, 26 Dec 2018 16:33:43 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Varghese, Vipin" Cc: "Pattan, Reshma" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "stephen@networkplumber.org" , "Mcnamara, John" , "Byrne, Stephen1" , "Patel, Amol" Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2018 22:33:26 +0100 Message-ID: <1797411.vFYqA0X0Ny@xps> In-Reply-To: <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D2DF1A4@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> References: <20181203055000.39012-2-vipin.varghese@intel.com> <1651608.RmD6NkZceM@xps> <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D2DF1A4@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/9] app/proc-info: improve debug of proc-info tool 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:33:48 -0000 26/12/2018 06:21, Varghese, Vipin: > HI Thomas, > > Snipped > > > > > Small nits > > > > 9th patch in this set is doc. So above info need to be corrected. > > > > if you are addressing my earlier comment of separating out mempool > > > > element iteration changes in to separate new patch 9/10 .Please keep > > > > my ack in next version > > > > > > Thanks for pointing this out, Like updated in email and chat I am not > > planning to split it. Hence no version 8. > > > > So, no ack and no merge? > > > > Looking at the first patches + doc patch, the split is not meaningful. > > You should merge doc and option parsing in the related patches. > > For instance, parsing and doc of "tm" option should be in the "tm" patch. > > I did not follow you request. Are you stating, for each functionality I should be updating document rather than 1 document update after adding the new functions? If former is true I am not able to find such reasoning stated in guideline or documentation or from the maintainer. Yes, you should update the doc while adding a new feature. But most importantly, there is no reason to do a patch adding some empty functions and filling them later. And please consider the option parsing is part of the feature.