From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 249207DF4 for ; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 09:40:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 05 Dec 2014 00:39:32 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,691,1406617200"; d="scan'208";a="494086930" Received: from pgsmsx108.gar.corp.intel.com ([10.221.44.103]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 05 Dec 2014 00:37:17 -0800 Received: from pgsmsx101.gar.corp.intel.com (10.221.44.78) by PGSMSX108.gar.corp.intel.com (10.221.44.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 16:38:32 +0800 Received: from shsmsx152.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.6.52) by PGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com (10.221.44.78) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 16:38:31 +0800 Received: from shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.216]) by SHSMSX152.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.6.5]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 16:38:30 +0800 From: "Chen, Jing D" To: Thomas Monjalon Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] i40e: Fix a vlan bug Thread-Index: AQHQD6e5LtHHrZY+mk2pPcece2l9IZx+s+sAgACGyJD//3zhAIAAwoFw//+Pj4CAAaMskA== Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2014 08:38:30 +0000 Message-ID: <4341B239C0EFF9468EE453F9E9F4604D0162BB03@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1417686605-6778-1-git-send-email-jing.d.chen@intel.com> <2122900.sczHU7BWUg@xps13> <4341B239C0EFF9468EE453F9E9F4604D0162B469@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <1575841.on6VhD6YKG@xps13> In-Reply-To: <1575841.on6VhD6YKG@xps13> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 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: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 08:40:44 -0000 Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 11:33 PM > To: Chen, Jing D > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Qiu, Michael > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] i40e: Fix a vlan bug >=20 > 2014-12-04 14:29, Chen, Jing D: > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > > 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 don't understand me. Please read my above words again. >=20 > Yes there probably is a misunderstanding. >=20 > > As I said, he is in vacation, I came to fix problem. I know exactly wha= t's the > problem. So, I used simple way. >=20 > So Huawei was trying to fix the bug and you suggest another way to fix it= . > But you didn't explain why your fix is better than the previous one. > And we don't know if it's the continuation of his work or not. > If you are trying to fix exactly the same problem, incrementing the versi= on > number of the patch makes clear that previous version doesn't need to be > reviewed, reworked or applied. In patchwork language, it supersedes the > previous patch which won't appear anymore. >=20 OK, I prefer to follow Huawei's patch set and drop my commit. > > > You are breaking all the elementary rules of patch management. > > > > Please kindly list all the elementary rules of patch management, please= . > > If possible, can you post it somewhere so other new guys can find and > follow? >=20 > They are explained in http://dpdk.org/dev#send. > That's the ones I've enumerated in my first email: > - changelog > - increment version number (v5 here) > - use --in-reply-to > Thanks for explanation.=20 =20 > > > We have currently 2 fixes pending for the same bug. >=20 > To sum it up, we need: > 1) a review > 2) an agreement that the Huawei's fix is superseded by this one >=20 > Thank you > -- > Thomas >=20 > > > PS: please don't top post. > > > > I apologized for 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 > >