From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FB555939
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue,  7 Oct 2014 18:50:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from hmsreliant.think-freely.org
 ([2001:470:8:a08:7aac:c0ff:fec2:933b] helo=localhost)
 by smtp.tuxdriver.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.63)
 (envelope-from <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>)
 id 1XbY4V-0003qt-GW; Tue, 07 Oct 2014 12:57:16 -0400
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 12:57:10 -0400
From: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Message-ID: <20141007165710.GD27719@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
References: <1411974986-28137-1-git-send-email-changchun.ouyang@intel.com>
 <3051759.IWc1oIhoHG@xps13>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3051759.IWc1oIhoHG@xps13>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--)
X-Spam-Status: No
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 00/18] Update IXGBE base code
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2014 16:50:07 -0000

On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 05:14:05PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> Hi Ouyang,
> 
> 2014-09-29 15:16, Ouyang Changchun:
> > This patch series update IXGBE base code (a.k.a. share code) from
> > package 2014.03.13 to package 2014.09.04
> 
> Applied
> 
> You did a big work to split patches and I did another big work
> to split all features and to make each commit compile-able
> (with a minor exception).
> As Neil asked, some comments are missing. But I push these commits
> as is because base drivers are special and it's already a good improvement
> since the last update submission.
> I'm confident that the next one will be even better in comments and splitting.
> 

Why would you do that?  I don't see any reasoning behind why base drivers are
"special" here. I had legitimate unanswered questions regarding this series.  If
you don't think my questions were relevant (specifically the question regarding
code reachability), please indicate why its not worth waiting for an answer on.
It seems to me like it wouldn't have been a hard question to settle (either
explain the reachability path, or remove the code).  Having the author ignore
the question, and having you integrate the code anyway, is a recepie for
promising questions like that never get addressed.

Regards
Neil