From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f173.google.com (mail-wi0-f173.google.com [209.85.212.173]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DF067E75 for ; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 11:39:19 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wi0-f173.google.com with SMTP id r20so34290097wiv.6 for ; Thu, 04 Dec 2014 02:39:19 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-type; bh=1YMYM9ksUzJ3OL2i8rzwyRGWwnGuuzFt6on4uH9Y/A0=; b=QJaXW3ciXsDjUKG6LBBSVTW5rgkZ5RzhFk4j27HBPuYgsdnxYCcKcSc15YITm3m7p2 vo14rzJLKYhVNb0XUHaXuvfOl/AaBtzHavusxVPXOPsgt2dh6gWpwm8HhqMLUmFK82+r 5vcxrNWfdzLhd7JVNf2ABWpsxS+DvvbPeGihDH7qD4Qa/xaTPW73KH28JwvqZYAnkade gbn1USt+UM1uJzwr4+RSDHrf5dylFT+W2ugkWo0cDYWBoKk5zqoUmvxZeM+xajBM1h3h GuwfgzbfV7FJKf/xih5rGlcTGZtwAg5h787YPSrv6osjRPzusnW0tivtSFtZ66TtKw7w 5shw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnmy2O1APoG5gZXZBSSnzIA47Hq+iqcdeforsUmmMM3sCwLCdnWtaPa6rDxJcawubz17kFx X-Received: by 10.180.73.101 with SMTP id k5mr29152007wiv.43.1417689559066; Thu, 04 Dec 2014 02:39:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps13.localnet (136-92-190-109.dsl.ovh.fr. [109.190.92.136]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id kv6sm39937516wjb.9.2014.12.04.02.39.17 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 04 Dec 2014 02:39:18 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Chen, Jing D" Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:38:54 +0100 Message-ID: <2122900.sczHU7BWUg@xps13> Organization: 6WIND User-Agent: KMail/4.14.3 (Linux/3.17.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.3; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <4341B239C0EFF9468EE453F9E9F4604D0162B2C6@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1417686605-6778-1-git-send-email-jing.d.chen@intel.com> <4822681.F5vea3YAsE@xps13> <4341B239C0EFF9468EE453F9E9F4604D0162B2C6@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] i40e: Fix a vlan bug 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: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:39:19 -0000 2014-12-04 10:30, Chen, Jing D: > As I don't know what commit he is based on, I'd like to generate a new patch with latest dpdk repo. There's something wrong here. You rework a patch and you don't know what was the current status but you expect that the reviewers can understand it better than you? You are breaking all the elementary rules of patch management. We have currently 2 fixes pending for the same bug. PS: please don't top post. -- Thomas > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 6:26 PM > > To: Chen, Jing D > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Qiu, Michael > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] i40e: Fix a vlan bug > > > > 2014-12-04 10:18, Qiu, Michael: > > > Hi Mark, > > > > > > I think Huawei (huawei.xie@intel.com) has one patch set to fix this issue. > > > > > > If your patch is totally different with him: > > > > > > [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/2] lib/librte_pmd_i40e: set vlan filter fix > > > > > > please ignore my comments :) > > > > > > But you both calculation are different. > > > > Yes, please Jing (Mark), if you reworked the v4 patch, it would clearer > > to have a changelog, to name it v5 and to insert it in the previous > > thread with --in-reply-to. > > At the moment, both patches block each other. > > > > -- > > Thomas