From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07A619A8F for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 05:03:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Feb 2016 20:02:41 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,453,1449561600"; d="scan'208";a="747007852" Received: from yliu-dev.sh.intel.com (HELO yliu-dev) ([10.239.66.49]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Feb 2016 20:02:39 -0800 Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 12:02:42 +0800 From: Yuanhan Liu To: Victor Kaplansky Message-ID: <20160216040242.GF21426@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> References: <20160212135131-mutt-send-email-victork@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160212135131-mutt-send-email-victork@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] dpdk: vhost/virtio staging/testing tree 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: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 04:03:10 -0000 On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 01:54:21PM +0200, Victor Kaplansky wrote: > Hi! Hi Victor, > Since I was maintaining an internal tree with patches related to > vhost/virtio, I decided to make this staging tree public. It is > useful to me and I hope it will be useful to others. > > Collecting patches like this allows tracking dependencies between > patches, their improvement etc. I also rebase the tree so > contributors don't have to. I had same thoughts, before, aiming to speed the patch review and merge process. DPDK community, likely, has a culture of very slow patch review and merge process: I often saw patches not get reviewed for weeks, even months! I also saw that a patch has been ACK-ed, but not get merged until few weeks has been passed. While I am inside the team, I understand it's a very reasonable phenomenon: every one of us has lots of tasks to do, and we intend to do the review after all tasks have been finished. Despite the fact, I was thinking that I could maintain a tree, so that I could apply all virtio/vhost patches that has been ACKed in the first time. Later, I will send pull request to Thomas, from time to time. Thomas, on the other hand, only need to have a double check of the patches from my request. If he has any concerns on some specific patch (or patch set), I will drop them, and let the author to send a new version. Put simply, it's a similar style Linux kernel (and QEMU) takes. Another thing worthy noting is that Bruce started to maintain a such tree recently: http://dpdk.org/browse/next/dpdk-next-net/ So, as long as Bruce merges patches quickly, it should not matter. > Before publishing, I test the tree so it can serve as a known > good state for people interested in preliminary testing of > patches that aren't yet upstream, improving testing/validation as > multiple people can test the same code. I was thinking to build a very rough and simple test bot to achieve that; however, no time for that. --yliu