From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEA67A0552; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 09:05:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D414340689; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 09:05:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A17840220 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 09:05:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E37185C019D; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 03:05:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 09 Jun 2022 03:05:20 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1654758320; x= 1654844720; bh=Pp97O4ddkLSxAinNtJ/r5wesgK07DOqnNNGncJ39ljE=; b=K HA0CgpWTCRxpieKq/jAQWIhKYmNxnx+6zT3Cl2f130ZRSDgy5R+gWXs6pDtJKkW7 5W40YRXxs6Ey7GVz6dthhr2zYaBSWX63CM2W/LGA06/vketshhKhiGTQXD37Ieg0 0S7an2azNxsLT0UUdMK6YEXw8O3wdovjJGLtcFl4MCtOXY/MMFepwJGYqO+UCfEx xGsnbGMSZqh/gaQPE6yVj47/5/kPKNOFv+Nq/Ahc12s6+7Qqtf+NL5XdE7dK2EJV kJJ6aNwpLnOLOF1pC2e5cs+y2ZJ7sAYbiMptu76uyvjVlsq0ON+oCPGHucMx+mZA hjoXsRTsgIgaHZf2Awc5w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t=1654758320; x= 1654844720; bh=Pp97O4ddkLSxAinNtJ/r5wesgK07DOqnNNGncJ39ljE=; b=t t8KholPGggCCwxuse1D2D/77aAryuaJnsj6RHXWJL8CcpiEICWs9MXofxRMxYw1I gole+Pye/wlcXR8EuA0iCx7ZINyo6jh7DQJ4EXkHaNJBSgxpCW6lygqGLGzCupWO Z/t39JIaro/tMgrqxTdA5MWdaN/0gONgqaOQFhweWVfSQI+IcDlvZZDFEC1nMRRh /qnsJnYRv5yo/3UsGKWAL2bJC5QYWznIjSYw3QsjIJrrBAAvUHxt29rUHLSVmh+H 1Y6Ov7E1VWsi2atoKUXK4aUkrTg3+wQvuYdCIMHdFSsfMFcV9bZYsenAvDKkiuMH NCALwPxn3jd/fUGM4YFBA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedruddtkedguddugecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvfevufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhho mhgrshcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqne cuggftrfgrthhtvghrnheptdejieeifeehtdffgfdvleetueeffeehueejgfeuteeftddt ieekgfekudehtdfgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilh hfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 03:05:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: fengchengwen Cc: Andrew Rybchenko , Spike Du , dev@dpdk.org, Xiaoyun Li , Aman Singh , Yuying Zhang , Ferruh Yigit , Ray Kinsella , mdr@ashroe.eu Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] ethdev: introduce available Rx descriptors threshold Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2022 09:05:16 +0200 Message-ID: <8994800.rMLUfLXkoz@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20220607125942.241379-1-spiked@nvidia.com> <22668814.6Emhk5qWAg@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org 09/06/2022 02:17, fengchengwen: > Hi Thomas, > > Could it possible accept the patch ' [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/4] ethdev: support device reset and recovery events' > which was delayed by ABI exceptions like this patch ? I suppose you refer to this explanation: +; Ignore ethdev event enum update +; because new event cannot be received if not registered That's true we discussed in the past that it should have no effect on applications compiled with an old version of DPDK. > PS: I noticed RC-1 was released just now and there may be no window left, but I think since this patch can be an > exception, why not that patch ? As far as I remember, the reset and recovery events patch have other comments to address before it can be accepted.