From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85C5D805D for ; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 12:38:38 +0100 (CET) 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 ) id 1XzOYI-0006BG-Bj; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 06:38:35 -0500 Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 06:38:24 -0500 From: Neil Horman To: Thomas Monjalon Message-ID: <20141212113824.GA14102@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> References: <1417684369-21330-1-git-send-email-michael.qiu@intel.com> <20141211132506.GA28213@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <533710CFB86FA344BFBF2D6802E60286C9EEB1@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> <9863237.MyFdkOxhYo@xps13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9863237.MyFdkOxhYo@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 0/2 v4] Fix two compile issues with i686 platform 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: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 11:38:38 -0000 On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:21:44PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2014-12-11 15:28, Qiu, Michael: > > On 2014/12/11 21:26, Neil Horman wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 01:56:06AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > >>> These two issues are both introuduced by commit b77b5639: > > >>> mem: add huge page sizes for IBM Power > > >>> > > >>> Michael Qiu (2): > > >>> Fix compile issue with hugepage_sz in 32-bit system > > >>> Fix compile issue of eal with icc compile > > >> Acked-by: Thomas Monjalon > > >> > > >> Applied > > >> > > >> Thanks > > >> > > > Wait, why did you apply this patch? We had outstanding debate on it, and > > > Michael indicated he was testing a new version of the patch. > > > > Yes, I test the solution you suggest :) and it mostly works, but with a > > little issue. > > I have re-post not the old version. > > Neil, v4 is a new version implementing what you suggested. > There was no comment and it looks good so I applied it. > > > Do you take a look at? > I didn't. Apologies, I see the v4 now. That said, something is off. If you look at the list archives, I see patch 0/2 v4 in the list, but not 1/2 or 2/2, theres no actual patch that got posted. Was it sent to you privately? > I think Neil missed the v4. Sorry to not have pinged you, I wanted rc4 for > validation at this time. > Neil do you agree this version is OK or do you see some issue to fix? > Again, I think Michales send went sideways. 0/4 went to the list but the actual patches only went to you Thomas. Please post them to the list Neil > -- > Thomas >