From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 889113777
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  5 Jan 2017 16:19:38 +0100 (CET)
Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26])
 by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 05 Jan 2017 07:19:37 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,321,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="1108403777"
Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.38])
 ([10.237.220.38])
 by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 05 Jan 2017 07:19:36 -0800
To: Nelio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>, dev@dpdk.org
References: <1481290078-4530-1-git-send-email-nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Message-ID: <2da35386-f774-a1ca-c4f2-cc77f74f6e2c@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 15:19:35 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1481290078-4530-1-git-send-email-nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/mlx5: fix Tx doorbell
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <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: Thu, 05 Jan 2017 15:19:38 -0000

On 12/9/2016 1:27 PM, Nelio Laranjeiro wrote:
> Too much data is uselessly written to the Tx doorbell.
> 
> Fixes: 1d88ba171942 ("net/mlx5: refactor Tx data path")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nelio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>
> Acked-by: Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>
> 

Applied to dpdk-next-net/master, thanks.

Is not CC'ing stable intentional, since this patch depends on a patch
introduced in this release? If not intentional, please CC stable.