From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77BB67F18 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2014 17:48:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 07 Nov 2014 08:55:57 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,333,1413270000"; d="scan'208";a="633389084" Received: from irsmsx101.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.153]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 07 Nov 2014 08:58:06 -0800 Received: from irsmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.11.82]) by IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.144]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Fri, 7 Nov 2014 16:58:05 +0000 From: "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" To: "Wodkowski, PawelX" , "Jastrzebski, MichalX K" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/2] bond: mode 4 support Thread-Index: AQHP+nq9+DGdv6q7JU237/mBCIaVzJxVLaAAgAAP7uCAACIDkA== Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2014 16:58:04 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1415358270-12523-1-git-send-email-michalx.k.jastrzebski@intel.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.181] 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 v3 0/2] bond: mode 4 support 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, 07 Nov 2014 16:48:35 -0000 Hi Pawel, > -----Original Message----- > From: Wodkowski, PawelX > Sent: Friday, November 07, 2014 3:05 PM > To: De Lara Guarch, Pablo; Jastrzebski, MichalX K > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/2] bond: mode 4 support >=20 > > Since Declan sent a v6 for link bonding changes, maybe it is a good ide= a > > to send another version, as v5 will not be merged. > > > > Pablo > Hi Pablo >=20 > I compared v6 patches vs patches produced by git rebase v5 patches > on top which I used to produce mode 4 v3 patches and I think they are > compatible. There is one difference is in unit tests but, fortunately I > do not touch unit tests yet so they are be applicable. I can't fully veri= fy > that as I am unable to apply patches in v6. > If you think this is insufficient perhaps I should wait for Declan's patc= hes > be merged into master branch. I just checked it and it applied fine, but there is a tiny problem. If you disable CONFIG_RTE_MBUF_REFCNT, then it hides the implementation of= =20 bond_ethdev_tx_burst_8023ad, and then you get a compilation error. It is solved by just moving the condition #ifdef RTE_MBUF_REFCNT after your= function, but still this will probably need another version or maybe a patch after. Thanks, Pablo >=20 > $ git apply d_v6/0007*.patch -v > Checking patch app/test-pmd/cmdline.c... > Checking patch app/test/test.h... > Checking patch app/test/test_link_bonding.c... > Checking patch app/test/virtual_pmd.c... > Checking patch app/test/virtual_pmd.h... > Checking patch doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/testpmd_funcs.rst... > error: doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/testpmd_funcs.rst: No such file or > directory > Checking patch lib/librte_pmd_bond/rte_eth_bond.h... > Checking patch lib/librte_pmd_bond/rte_eth_bond_api.c... > Checking patch lib/librte_pmd_bond/rte_eth_bond_args.c... > Checking patch lib/librte_pmd_bond/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c... > Checking patch lib/librte_pmd_bond/rte_eth_bond_private.h... >=20 > Pawel