From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63B12C574
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 08:38:01 +0100 (CET)
Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26])
 by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Jan 2016 23:38:00 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,362,1449561600"; d="scan'208";a="903668321"
Received: from yliu-dev.sh.intel.com (HELO yliu-dev) ([10.239.66.49])
 by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Jan 2016 23:37:59 -0800
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 15:38:46 +0800
From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
To: Santosh Shukla <sshukla@mvista.com>
Message-ID: <20160129073846.GT4257@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
References: <1453203972-24855-1-git-send-email-sshukla@mvista.com>
 <1453203972-24855-11-git-send-email-sshukla@mvista.com>
 <20160129070112.GO4257@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <CAAyOgsaKjR8O3eMNA8vnVNGpqyjO14UH1hCzgQkeWwQ2=3Z7Sw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAAyOgsaKjR8O3eMNA8vnVNGpqyjO14UH1hCzgQkeWwQ2=3Z7Sw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 10/11] virtio: pci: add dummy func
 definition for in/outb for non-x86 arch
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: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 07:38:01 -0000

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 01:01:02PM +0530, Santosh Shukla wrote:
> > Another generic comment about this patchset is that it VERY okay to
> > include several components change in one set, but putting them in
> > order helps review a lot.
> >
> > Say, this patch set has dependence on VFIO stuff, therefore, it'd be
> > much better __IF__ you can put all VFIO related patches first, and
> > then virtio related patches follows, but not in an interleaved way
> > you did. If, for somereason, you can't do that, you should at least
> > try to minimise the chance of interleave.
> >
> 
> I agree that, but this patch series dependent on other patches
> including virtio 1.0 and then vfio-noiommu, its was difficult for me
> to keep topic-wise sanity in patch series.

That would not be an issue to me: just apply the dependence patches
first, and build your patches on top of that. You just need mention
the dependence info in your cover-letter.

	--yliu
> 
> V6 will take care patch ordering. Thanks

Thanks!

	--yliu