From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98D6FA0679 for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 18:38:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C6565A6E; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 18:38:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A5942BAE for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 18:38:12 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Apr 2019 09:38:12 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,414,1549958400"; d="scan'208";a="342200075" Received: from aburakov-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.113]) ([10.237.220.113]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 30 Apr 2019 09:38:10 -0700 To: "Varghese, Vipin" <vipin.varghese@intel.com>, "Suanming.Mou" <mousuanming@huawei.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org> References: <1556428025-49290-1-git-send-email-mousuanming@huawei.com> <1556595548-53745-1-git-send-email-mousuanming@huawei.com> <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D33FA5F@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> <ca8dd6fd-e9f1-7ff3-af89-bd37cd538469@intel.com> <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D33FC60@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> From: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com> Message-ID: <0c660511-0761-fadf-c2ca-d89f643e5318@intel.com> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 17:38:09 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D33FC60@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] app/pdump: add pudmp exits with primary support. X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> Message-ID: <20190430163809.hqy-BwkWfHvk8RY21Cilssqq3QQhRZPaBkAkm3mTeq4@z> On 30-Apr-19 11:37 AM, Varghese, Vipin wrote: > snipped >>> Thanks for the patch work with rte_eal_alaram. But I am not able to >>> find >>> >>> 1. the documentation update. >>> 2. cover letter. >> >> Why would a single patch need a cover letter? I don't think it's needed in this >> case. The commit message is enough. > > In my opinion, the cover letter is to be added as it is new feature and explains the reasoning behind the new change. Please let me know if there change in the same? > > snipped > I'm obviously not an expert in cover letters, but in my view, cover letter is only necessary whenever there is a complex patchset that requires some explanation, background, etc. If there is only one patch, everything that you could reasonably put in the cover letter should go either into the commit message itself, or into commit notes if there is some supplemental data (e.g. benchmark results etc.). Creating cover letters for single patches is just unnecessary work IMO. -- Thanks, Anatoly