* [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure @ 2016-07-19 14:01 Olivier Matz 2016-07-19 14:40 ` Bruce Richardson 2016-07-20 7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Olivier Matz 0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Olivier Matz @ 2016-07-19 14:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dev; +Cc: jerin.jacob, thomas.monjalon For 16.11, the mbuf structure will be modified implying ABI breakage. Some discussions already took place here: http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12878/ Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> --- doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst index f502f86..2245bc2 100644 --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst @@ -41,3 +41,9 @@ Deprecation Notices * The mempool functions for single/multi producer/consumer are deprecated and will be removed in 16.11. It is replaced by rte_mempool_generic_get/put functions. + +* ABI changes are planned for 16.11 in the ``rte_mbuf`` structure: some + fields will be reordered to facilitate the writing of ``data_off``, + ``refcnt``, and ``nb_segs`` in one operation. Indeed, some platforms + have an overhead if the store address is not naturally aligned. The + useless ``port`` field will also be removed at the same occasion. -- 2.8.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure 2016-07-19 14:01 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure Olivier Matz @ 2016-07-19 14:40 ` Bruce Richardson 2016-07-19 15:04 ` Olivier Matz 2016-07-20 7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Olivier Matz 1 sibling, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Bruce Richardson @ 2016-07-19 14:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Matz; +Cc: dev, jerin.jacob, thomas.monjalon On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 04:01:15PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote: > For 16.11, the mbuf structure will be modified implying ABI breakage. > Some discussions already took place here: > http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12878/ > > Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> > --- > doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > index f502f86..2245bc2 100644 > --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > @@ -41,3 +41,9 @@ Deprecation Notices > * The mempool functions for single/multi producer/consumer are deprecated and > will be removed in 16.11. > It is replaced by rte_mempool_generic_get/put functions. > + > +* ABI changes are planned for 16.11 in the ``rte_mbuf`` structure: some > + fields will be reordered to facilitate the writing of ``data_off``, > + ``refcnt``, and ``nb_segs`` in one operation. Indeed, some platforms > + have an overhead if the store address is not naturally aligned. The > + useless ``port`` field will also be removed at the same occasion. > -- Have we fully bottomed out on the mbuf changes. I'm not sure that once patches start getting considered for merge, new opinions may come forward. For instance, is the "port" field really "useless"? Would it not be better to put in a less specific deprecation notice? What happens if this notice goes in and the final changes are different from those called out here? /Bruce ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure 2016-07-19 14:40 ` Bruce Richardson @ 2016-07-19 15:04 ` Olivier Matz 2016-07-19 15:07 ` Richardson, Bruce 0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Olivier Matz @ 2016-07-19 15:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bruce Richardson; +Cc: dev, jerin.jacob, thomas.monjalon Hi Bruce, On 07/19/2016 04:40 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 04:01:15PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote: >> For 16.11, the mbuf structure will be modified implying ABI breakage. >> Some discussions already took place here: >> http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12878/ >> >> Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> >> --- >> doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 6 ++++++ >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst >> index f502f86..2245bc2 100644 >> --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst >> +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst >> @@ -41,3 +41,9 @@ Deprecation Notices >> * The mempool functions for single/multi producer/consumer are deprecated and >> will be removed in 16.11. >> It is replaced by rte_mempool_generic_get/put functions. >> + >> +* ABI changes are planned for 16.11 in the ``rte_mbuf`` structure: some >> + fields will be reordered to facilitate the writing of ``data_off``, >> + ``refcnt``, and ``nb_segs`` in one operation. Indeed, some platforms >> + have an overhead if the store address is not naturally aligned. The >> + useless ``port`` field will also be removed at the same occasion. >> -- > > Have we fully bottomed out on the mbuf changes. I'm not sure that once patches > start getting considered for merge, new opinions may come forward. For instance, > is the "port" field really "useless"? > > Would it not be better to put in a less specific deprecation notice? What happens > if this notice goes in and the final changes are different from those called out > here? Yes, you are right. What about the following text? ABI changes are planned for 16.11 in the ``rte_mbuf`` structure: some fields may be reordered to facilitate the writing of ``data_off``, ``refcnt``, and ``nb_segs`` in one operation. Indeed, some platforms have an overhead if the store address is not naturally aligned. The ``port`` field may also be removed at the same occasion. Thanks, Olivier ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure 2016-07-19 15:04 ` Olivier Matz @ 2016-07-19 15:07 ` Richardson, Bruce 2016-07-19 15:28 ` Olivier Matz 0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Richardson, Bruce @ 2016-07-19 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Matz; +Cc: dev, jerin.jacob, thomas.monjalon > -----Original Message----- > From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com] > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 4:04 PM > To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com; > thomas.monjalon@6wind.com > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf > structure > > Hi Bruce, > > On 07/19/2016 04:40 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 04:01:15PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote: > >> For 16.11, the mbuf structure will be modified implying ABI breakage. > >> Some discussions already took place here: > >> http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12878/ > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> > >> --- > >> doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 6 ++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > >> b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > >> index f502f86..2245bc2 100644 > >> --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > >> +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > >> @@ -41,3 +41,9 @@ Deprecation Notices > >> * The mempool functions for single/multi producer/consumer are > deprecated and > >> will be removed in 16.11. > >> It is replaced by rte_mempool_generic_get/put functions. > >> + > >> +* ABI changes are planned for 16.11 in the ``rte_mbuf`` structure: > >> +some > >> + fields will be reordered to facilitate the writing of > >> +``data_off``, > >> + ``refcnt``, and ``nb_segs`` in one operation. Indeed, some > >> +platforms > >> + have an overhead if the store address is not naturally aligned. > >> +The > >> + useless ``port`` field will also be removed at the same occasion. > >> -- > > > > Have we fully bottomed out on the mbuf changes. I'm not sure that once > > patches start getting considered for merge, new opinions may come > > forward. For instance, is the "port" field really "useless"? > > > > Would it not be better to put in a less specific deprecation notice? > > What happens if this notice goes in and the final changes are > > different from those called out here? > > Yes, you are right. What about the following text? > > ABI changes are planned for 16.11 in the ``rte_mbuf`` structure: some > fields may be reordered to facilitate the writing of ``data_off``, > ``refcnt``, and ``nb_segs`` in one operation. Indeed, some platforms have > an overhead if the store address is not naturally aligned. The ``port`` > field may also be removed at the same occasion. > Better. Two suggestions: 1. change "Indeed" to "because" and join the sentences. 2. change the last sentence to be even more general: "Other mbuf fields, such as the port field, may be moved or removed as part of this mbuf work". /Bruce ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure 2016-07-19 15:07 ` Richardson, Bruce @ 2016-07-19 15:28 ` Olivier Matz 0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Olivier Matz @ 2016-07-19 15:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richardson, Bruce; +Cc: dev, jerin.jacob, thomas.monjalon On 07/19/2016 05:07 PM, Richardson, Bruce wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 4:04 PM >> To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com> >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com; >> thomas.monjalon@6wind.com >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf >> structure >> >> Hi Bruce, >> >> On 07/19/2016 04:40 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 04:01:15PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote: >>>> For 16.11, the mbuf structure will be modified implying ABI breakage. >>>> Some discussions already took place here: >>>> http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12878/ >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> >>>> --- >>>> doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 6 ++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst >>>> b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst >>>> index f502f86..2245bc2 100644 >>>> --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst >>>> +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst >>>> @@ -41,3 +41,9 @@ Deprecation Notices >>>> * The mempool functions for single/multi producer/consumer are >> deprecated and >>>> will be removed in 16.11. >>>> It is replaced by rte_mempool_generic_get/put functions. >>>> + >>>> +* ABI changes are planned for 16.11 in the ``rte_mbuf`` structure: >>>> +some >>>> + fields will be reordered to facilitate the writing of >>>> +``data_off``, >>>> + ``refcnt``, and ``nb_segs`` in one operation. Indeed, some >>>> +platforms >>>> + have an overhead if the store address is not naturally aligned. >>>> +The >>>> + useless ``port`` field will also be removed at the same occasion. >>>> -- >>> >>> Have we fully bottomed out on the mbuf changes. I'm not sure that once >>> patches start getting considered for merge, new opinions may come >>> forward. For instance, is the "port" field really "useless"? >>> >>> Would it not be better to put in a less specific deprecation notice? >>> What happens if this notice goes in and the final changes are >>> different from those called out here? >> >> Yes, you are right. What about the following text? >> >> ABI changes are planned for 16.11 in the ``rte_mbuf`` structure: some >> fields may be reordered to facilitate the writing of ``data_off``, >> ``refcnt``, and ``nb_segs`` in one operation. Indeed, some platforms have >> an overhead if the store address is not naturally aligned. The ``port`` >> field may also be removed at the same occasion. >> > Better. Two suggestions: > 1. change "Indeed" to "because" and join the sentences. > 2. change the last sentence to be even more general: "Other mbuf fields, such as the port field, may be moved or removed as part of this mbuf work". It's much better indeed ;) Thanks Bruce, I'll submit a v2. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure 2016-07-19 14:01 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure Olivier Matz 2016-07-19 14:40 ` Bruce Richardson @ 2016-07-20 7:16 ` Olivier Matz 2016-07-20 8:54 ` Ferruh Yigit ` (4 more replies) 1 sibling, 5 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Olivier Matz @ 2016-07-20 7:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dev; +Cc: jerin.jacob, thomas.monjalon, bruce.richardson For 16.11, the mbuf structure will be modified implying ABI breakage. Some discussions already took place here: http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12878/ Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> --- v1->v2: - reword the sentences to keep things more open, as suggested by Bruce doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst index f502f86..b9f5a93 100644 --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst @@ -41,3 +41,9 @@ Deprecation Notices * The mempool functions for single/multi producer/consumer are deprecated and will be removed in 16.11. It is replaced by rte_mempool_generic_get/put functions. + +* ABI changes are planned for 16.11 in the ``rte_mbuf`` structure: some fields + may be reordered to facilitate the writing of ``data_off``, ``refcnt``, and + ``nb_segs`` in one operation, because some platforms have an overhead if the + store address is not naturally aligned. Other mbuf fields, such as the + ``port`` field, may be moved or removed as part of this mbuf work. -- 2.8.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure 2016-07-20 7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Olivier Matz @ 2016-07-20 8:54 ` Ferruh Yigit 2016-07-27 8:33 ` Thomas Monjalon ` (3 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Ferruh Yigit @ 2016-07-20 8:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Matz, dev; +Cc: jerin.jacob, thomas.monjalon, bruce.richardson On 7/20/2016 8:16 AM, Olivier Matz wrote: > For 16.11, the mbuf structure will be modified implying ABI breakage. > Some discussions already took place here: > http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12878/ > > Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> > --- > > v1->v2: > - reword the sentences to keep things more open, as suggested by Bruce > > doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > index f502f86..b9f5a93 100644 > --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > @@ -41,3 +41,9 @@ Deprecation Notices > * The mempool functions for single/multi producer/consumer are deprecated and > will be removed in 16.11. > It is replaced by rte_mempool_generic_get/put functions. > + > +* ABI changes are planned for 16.11 in the ``rte_mbuf`` structure: some fields > + may be reordered to facilitate the writing of ``data_off``, ``refcnt``, and > + ``nb_segs`` in one operation, because some platforms have an overhead if the > + store address is not naturally aligned. Other mbuf fields, such as the > + ``port`` field, may be moved or removed as part of this mbuf work. > Not directly related to this patch, but generally for deprecation notices, does it make sense to tag explicitly which library effected, like: * librte_mbuf [perhaps with version here]: Explanation about deprecation ... For this case it is more clear which library effected, but sometimes that is not obvious from deprecation notice. Also when checked for if specific library effected, it is harder to find with current notes. Thanks, ferruh ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure 2016-07-20 7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Olivier Matz 2016-07-20 8:54 ` Ferruh Yigit @ 2016-07-27 8:33 ` Thomas Monjalon 2016-07-28 18:04 ` Thomas Monjalon 2016-07-27 9:34 ` Ananyev, Konstantin ` (2 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2016-07-27 8:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Matz; +Cc: dev, jerin.jacob, bruce.richardson > For 16.11, the mbuf structure will be modified implying ABI breakage. > Some discussions already took place here: > http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12878/ > > Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> Acked-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure 2016-07-27 8:33 ` Thomas Monjalon @ 2016-07-28 18:04 ` Thomas Monjalon 0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2016-07-28 18:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Matz; +Cc: dev, jerin.jacob, bruce.richardson > > For 16.11, the mbuf structure will be modified implying ABI breakage. > > Some discussions already took place here: > > http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12878/ > > > > Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> > > Acked-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> Acked-by: John Daley <johndale@cisco.com> Acked-by: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com> Applied, thanks ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure 2016-07-20 7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Olivier Matz 2016-07-20 8:54 ` Ferruh Yigit 2016-07-27 8:33 ` Thomas Monjalon @ 2016-07-27 9:34 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2016-07-28 2:35 ` John Daley (johndale) 2016-07-28 2:39 ` Jerin Jacob 4 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Ananyev, Konstantin @ 2016-07-27 9:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Matz, dev; +Cc: jerin.jacob, thomas.monjalon, Richardson, Bruce > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 8:16 AM > To: dev@dpdk.org > Cc: jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com; thomas.monjalon@6wind.com; Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com> > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure > > For 16.11, the mbuf structure will be modified implying ABI breakage. > Some discussions already took place here: > http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12878/ > > Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> > --- > > v1->v2: > - reword the sentences to keep things more open, as suggested by Bruce > > doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > index f502f86..b9f5a93 100644 > --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > @@ -41,3 +41,9 @@ Deprecation Notices > * The mempool functions for single/multi producer/consumer are deprecated and > will be removed in 16.11. > It is replaced by rte_mempool_generic_get/put functions. > + > +* ABI changes are planned for 16.11 in the ``rte_mbuf`` structure: some fields > + may be reordered to facilitate the writing of ``data_off``, ``refcnt``, and > + ``nb_segs`` in one operation, because some platforms have an overhead if the > + store address is not naturally aligned. Other mbuf fields, such as the > + ``port`` field, may be moved or removed as part of this mbuf work. > -- Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> > 2.8.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure 2016-07-20 7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Olivier Matz ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2016-07-27 9:34 ` Ananyev, Konstantin @ 2016-07-28 2:35 ` John Daley (johndale) 2016-07-28 2:39 ` Jerin Jacob 4 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: John Daley (johndale) @ 2016-07-28 2:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Matz, dev; +Cc: jerin.jacob, thomas.monjalon, bruce.richardson > > For 16.11, the mbuf structure will be modified implying ABI breakage. > Some discussions already took place here: > http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12878/ > > Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> > --- Acked-by: John Daley <johndale@cisco.com> Also, definitely +1 on trying to get m->next into the first cache line. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure 2016-07-20 7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Olivier Matz ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2016-07-28 2:35 ` John Daley (johndale) @ 2016-07-28 2:39 ` Jerin Jacob 4 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Jerin Jacob @ 2016-07-28 2:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Matz; +Cc: dev, thomas.monjalon, bruce.richardson On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 09:16:14AM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote: > For 16.11, the mbuf structure will be modified implying ABI breakage. > Some discussions already took place here: > http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12878/ > > Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> Acked-by: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-07-28 18:04 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2016-07-19 14:01 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure Olivier Matz 2016-07-19 14:40 ` Bruce Richardson 2016-07-19 15:04 ` Olivier Matz 2016-07-19 15:07 ` Richardson, Bruce 2016-07-19 15:28 ` Olivier Matz 2016-07-20 7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Olivier Matz 2016-07-20 8:54 ` Ferruh Yigit 2016-07-27 8:33 ` Thomas Monjalon 2016-07-28 18:04 ` Thomas Monjalon 2016-07-27 9:34 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2016-07-28 2:35 ` John Daley (johndale) 2016-07-28 2:39 ` Jerin Jacob
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).