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 900337E79 for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 02:09:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Dec 2014 17:07:59 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,541,1413270000"; d="scan'208";a="650619845" Received: from pgsmsx104.gar.corp.intel.com ([10.221.44.91]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Dec 2014 17:09:50 -0800 Received: from pgsmsx102.gar.corp.intel.com (10.221.44.80) by PGSMSX104.gar.corp.intel.com (10.221.44.91) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 09:09:47 +0800 Received: from shsmsx152.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.6.52) by PGSMSX102.gar.corp.intel.com (10.221.44.80) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 09:09:47 +0800 Received: from shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.216]) by SHSMSX152.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.6.5]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 09:08:30 +0800 From: "Ouyang, Changchun" To: Thomas Monjalon , Stephen Hemminger Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio implementation Thread-Index: AQHQEq9IYZVt6icOSU2o3C0ovIVpDpyE58oAgAGGl/A= Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2014 01:08:29 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1418019716-4962-1-git-send-email-changchun.ouyang@intel.com> <4047137.blhnCyLAqS@xps13> In-Reply-To: <4047137.blhnCyLAqS@xps13> Accept-Language: zh-CN, 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 01:09:54 -0000 Hi Thomas, > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 5:31 PM > To: Ouyang, Changchun > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio implementation >=20 > Hi Changchun, >=20 > 2014-12-08 14:21, Ouyang Changchun: > > This patch set bases on two original RFC patch sets from Stephen > Hemminger[stephen@networkplumber.org] > > Refer to [http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-August/004845.html ] for > the original one. > > This patch set also resolves some conflict with latest codes and remove= d > duplicated codes. >=20 > As you sent the patches, you appear as the author. > But I guess Stephen should be the author for some of them. > Please check who has contributed the most in each patch to decide. You are right, most of patches originate from Stephen's patchset, except fo= r the last one, To be honest, I am ok whoever is the author of this patch set, :-), We could co-own the feature of Single virtio if you all agree with it, and = I think we couldn't finish Such a feature without collaboration among us, this is why I tried to commu= nicate with most of you=20 to collect more feedback, suggestion and comments for this feature. Very appreciate for all kinds of feedback, suggestion here, especially for = patch set from Stephen.=20 According to your request, how could we make this patch set looks more like= Stephen as the author?=20 Currently I add Stephen as Signed-off-by list in each patch(I got the agree= ment from Stephen before doing this :-)). Need I send all patchset to Stephen and let Stephen send out them to dpdk.o= rg? Or any other better solution? If you has better suggestion, I assume it works for all subsequent RFC and = normal patch set. =20 Any other suggestions are welcome. Thanks Changchun