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 DE1A8A0C4C; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 22:39:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3E1F41124; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 22:39:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-il1-f169.google.com (mail-il1-f169.google.com [209.85.166.169]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1C694111A for ; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 22:39:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-il1-f169.google.com with SMTP id r9so407134ile.5 for ; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 13:39:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadcom.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Dmyrvb0i8Of16MG9icefDbPDjpKBm1QYn6VwPBxdMBU=; b=f6Zlbxg2atzpUYUdA4jhZK2UlEPjjFsJWOZ3tJ49JlOpgdXXWwdraryEQ4C4x5j/2o HZMZ0QPuPGB0zAxcLe6j5l67cAi8qn5r3fHhdcH5G/i5iDtmXRGmlzeNWCpXV7yELcLC uZV+aYP1xPR5aHcM8HWxD87uF/5jHnh3Z6UWA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Dmyrvb0i8Of16MG9icefDbPDjpKBm1QYn6VwPBxdMBU=; b=BlAs9KTP6gFguzwjhjOmyv+Yrf9X+CsCOZmMSTK+9RHthurFykBzdFAIt9uIEh9icK rE0lxKgeBkiYR4rfufTdoDGUlRK8qMXa8QA4FZqTHN/YF5buqoVJ7++leLoK6tRiVOUh 2yR0uOvQLfsOBxcbxpssEXN4bMu/f/atrPIJkmnyP4XcfkbMHHpPHlc2rEGt1ENHTSG8 29eWjJG3d42zqdYtv4hJJfftjzdwvLQ0bwSeDiorHPKfoe/Q2Q6R0B6zmWRpZZwTUwBz diC9IAvcw9NofaduyYWaemZ4O0MFAmETXfkdsReYUsioQVY3ul5Frjmhc6yW5wO+y727 av4g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530fkAxgvg4HQKHND4LlT5YT8Acncs2W9OODmWoX3J4hYcVbzlUC KR9qgcYEpSoOE0itNvPNV++n7W9WWvDF1Y12dJpW6MHpJMw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyM6BZMj47aTXhe5tU7ZyYSniRfny5wEw4JmkTwm1xN7fMUp0k7AjmkTR6ESpcJLsfYiRh+XGAEeLDrkQBaagU= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:178a:: with SMTP id y10mr9440586ilu.26.1634071184257; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 13:39:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211007032353.93579-1-ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com> <0adf092e-8ab0-3d31-33f6-bd41c61ac2fc@intel.com> In-Reply-To: From: Ajit Khaparde Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2021 13:39:27 -0700 Message-ID: To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: dpdk-dev Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="0000000000007d2d2e05ce2dd8f2" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/3] patchset for bnxt PMD 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 Sender: "dev" --0000000000007d2d2e05ce2dd8f2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 1:30 PM Ajit Khaparde wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 12:49 PM Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > > > On 10/12/2021 8:03 PM, Ajit Khaparde wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 11:16 AM Ajit Khaparde > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 11:14 AM Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > >>> > > >>> On 10/7/2021 5:54 PM, Ajit Khaparde wrote: > > >>>> On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 8:23 PM Ajit Khaparde > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Apart from fixing an issue with Rx queue state at startup, > > >>>>> this patchset enhances support for RSS action and > > >>>>> optimizes the mbuf requirement at startup by creating the > > >>>>> aggregation rings only when needed (rx_scatter is enabled). > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Please apply! > > >>>>> > > >>>> Patchset applied to dpdk-next-net-brcm. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> Hi Ajit, > > >>> > > >>> dpdk-next-net-brcm conflicts with next-net because of some patches > > >>> updating bnxt in next-net. > > >>> Can you please rebase 'dpdk-next-net-brcm' on top of latest next-net? > > >> Sure. I will send an email once it's ready. > > > Done. I have rebased the repo to the latest next-net/main > > > and merged the patches. Please try now. > > > > > > > Hi Ajit, > > > > I am getting lots of checkpatch warnings on the patches in your tree, > > but I don't see them in the patchwork. Warnings can be because of the > > updates during rebase. > > > > If there is code change during rebase, to not have a diverge between > > the patch in the patchwork and what we are merging, can you please send > > and updated version of the effected patches first? > There is no code change made during the rebase. > My checkpatch run did not point out anything. > But let me try again. Thanks Ferruh. Ok, got it. I had done the merge on a new system which did not have the checkpatch setup correctly. I have fixed the issues and updated the tree. Apologies for the trouble. Thanks Ajit > > Thanks > Ajit > > > > > This lets us see the CI results and later they can be merge in your tree > > again. > > --0000000000007d2d2e05ce2dd8f2--