From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D1291B3EC for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2019 09:14:35 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 31 Jan 2019 00:14:35 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,543,1539673200"; d="scan'208";a="295916846" Received: from yexl-server.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.67.110.206]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Jan 2019 00:14:33 -0800 Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 16:13:37 +0800 From: Ye Xiaolong To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: Stephen Hemminger , dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20190131081337.GB17292@intel.com> References: <20190115154626.34516-1-xiaolong.ye@intel.com> <20190116003452.37403-1-xiaolong.ye@intel.com> <20190115173822.25a4a979@shemminger-XPS-13-9360> <20190116074836.GB39571@intel.com> <20190116105521.0254cdb2@shemminger-XPS-13-9360> <20190117021354.GA47093@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] igb_uio: remove out-of-date comment X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: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: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 08:14:36 -0000 Hi, Ferruh On 01/29, Ferruh Yigit wrote: [snip] > >Hi Xiaolong, > >Your analysis looks correct, thanks for history provided, it seems renaming >"state" to "status" was not correct [1]. > >The intention of the 'pci_check_and_mask_intx()' is mask the interrupt if it is >from this device, so your suggestion looks correct to me. > >Only concern is how we can test the change, most probably existing code is also >failing but able to find its way since it is not tested fully. To be sure we are >also not missing anything, I think better to test the code before getting it. >Are you aware of any way to test updated code? > Yes, I am also thinking about how to verify the change, will update once I find a proper method. > >And related to the initial patch, removing the comment, I think the comment is >informative within the context of 'igbuio_pci_irqhandler()', so I suggest moving >if from begging of the function into it just above legacy interrupt change. > Sure, will do. Thanks, Xiaolong >[1] >5b2f8137 ("igb_uio: fix typos for kernel older than 3.3") > > >Thanks, >ferruh