From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A301D7E79 for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 04:23:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Dec 2014 19:23:26 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,542,1413270000"; d="scan'208";a="650663946" Received: from kmsmsx153.gar.corp.intel.com ([172.21.73.88]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Dec 2014 19:23:25 -0800 Received: from shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.4.154) by KMSMSX153.gar.corp.intel.com (172.21.73.88) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 11:23:19 +0800 Received: from shsmsx101.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.110]) by shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.216]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 11:23:17 +0800 From: "Qiu, Michael" To: "Ouyang, Changchun" , Thomas Monjalon , Stephen Hemminger Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio implementation Thread-Index: AQHQEq+Q2Lq/26W45UWXqeMFusY+cw== Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2014 03:23:16 +0000 Message-ID: <533710CFB86FA344BFBF2D6802E60286C9DE44@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1418019716-4962-1-git-send-email-changchun.ouyang@intel.com> <4047137.blhnCyLAqS@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] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio implementation 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: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 03:23:28 -0000 On 12/9/2014 9:11 AM, Ouyang, Changchun wrote:=0A= > Hi Thomas,=0A= >=0A= >> -----Original Message-----=0A= >> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]=0A= >> Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 5:31 PM=0A= >> To: Ouyang, Changchun=0A= >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org=0A= >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio implementation= =0A= >>=0A= >> Hi Changchun,=0A= >>=0A= >> 2014-12-08 14:21, Ouyang Changchun:=0A= >>> This patch set bases on two original RFC patch sets from Stephen=0A= >> Hemminger[stephen@networkplumber.org]=0A= >>> Refer to [http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-August/004845.html ] for= =0A= >> the original one.=0A= >>> This patch set also resolves some conflict with latest codes and remove= d=0A= >> duplicated codes.=0A= >>=0A= >> As you sent the patches, you appear as the author.=0A= >> But I guess Stephen should be the author for some of them.=0A= >> Please check who has contributed the most in each patch to decide.=0A= > You are right, most of patches originate from Stephen's patchset, except = for the last one,=0A= > To be honest, I am ok whoever is the author of this patch set, :-),=0A= > We could co-own the feature of Single virtio if you all agree with it, an= d I think we couldn't finish=0A= > Such a feature without collaboration among us, this is why I tried to com= municate with most of you =0A= > to collect more feedback, suggestion and comments for this feature.=0A= > Very appreciate for all kinds of feedback, suggestion here, especially fo= r patch set from Stephen. =0A= >=0A= > According to your request, how could we make this patch set looks more li= ke Stephen as the author? =0A= > Currently I add Stephen as Signed-off-by list in each patch(I got the agr= eement from Stephen before doing this :-)).=0A= =0A= Hi Ouyang,=0A= =0A= "Signed-off-by" should be added by himself, because the one who in the Sign= ed-off-by list should take responsibility for it(like potential bugs/issues= ).=0A= =0A= Although, lots of patches are originate from Stephen, we still need himself= add this line :)=0A= =0A= If DPDK community's Signed-off-by" rule is different from linux(qemu, etc.)= , please ignore my comment :)=0A= =0A= Thanks,=0A= Michael =0A= =0A= > Need I send all patchset to Stephen and let Stephen send out them to dpdk= .org?=0A= > Or any other better solution?=0A= > If you has better suggestion, I assume it works for all subsequent RFC an= d normal patch set.=0A= > =0A= > Any other suggestions are welcome.=0A= >=0A= > Thanks=0A= > Changchun=0A= >=0A= >=0A= >=0A= >=0A= =0A=