From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFAB97F2D for ; Wed, 10 Dec 2014 01:29:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 Dec 2014 16:29:51 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,548,1413270000"; d="scan'208";a="621295238" Received: from pgsmsx103.gar.corp.intel.com ([10.221.44.82]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 Dec 2014 16:29:50 -0800 Received: from shsmsx152.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.6.52) by PGSMSX103.gar.corp.intel.com (10.221.44.82) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Wed, 10 Dec 2014 08:29:49 +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; Wed, 10 Dec 2014 08:29:47 +0800 From: "Ouyang, Changchun" To: "Qiu, Michael" , "Richardson, Bruce" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio implementation Thread-Index: AQHQEq9IYZVt6icOSU2o3C0ovIVpDpyH+ylw Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 00:29:47 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1418019716-4962-1-git-send-email-changchun.ouyang@intel.com> <533710CFB86FA344BFBF2D6802E60286C9DE44@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> <1941671.RlrZxTondI@xps13> <20141209094658.GA9472@bricha3-MOBL3> <533710CFB86FA344BFBF2D6802E60286C9E267@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <533710CFB86FA344BFBF2D6802E60286C9E267@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> 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: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 00:29:54 -0000 Hi Michael, > -----Original Message----- > From: Qiu, Michael > Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 12:03 AM > To: Ouyang, Changchun; Richardson, Bruce > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio implementation >=20 > On 2014/12/9 22:19, Ouyang, Changchun wrote: > > Hi Bruce, > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Richardson, Bruce > >> Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 5:47 PM > >> To: Ouyang, Changchun > >> Cc: Thomas Monjalon; dev@dpdk.org > >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio > >> implementation > >> > >> On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 06:40:23AM +0000, Ouyang, Changchun wrote: > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > >>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 2:12 PM > >>>> To: Ouyang, Changchun > >>>> Cc: Qiu, Michael; Stephen Hemminger; dev@dpdk.org > >>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio > >>>> implementation > >>>> > >>>> 2014-12-09 05:41, Ouyang, Changchun: > >>>>> Hi > >>>>> > >>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>> From: Qiu, Michael > >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 11:23 AM > >>>>>> To: Ouyang, Changchun; Thomas Monjalon; Stephen Hemminger > >>>>>> Cc: dev@dpdk.org > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio > >>>>>> implementation > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 12/9/2014 9:11 AM, Ouyang, Changchun wrote: > >>>>>>> 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 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hi Changchun, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 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 removed > >>>>>>>> duplicated codes. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 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 for 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 communicate > >>>>>> with most of you 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. > >>>>>>> According to your request, how could we make this patch set > >>>>>>> looks more > >>>>>> like Stephen as the author? > >>>>>>> Currently I add Stephen as Signed-off-by list in each patch(I > >>>>>>> got the > >>>>>> agreement from Stephen before doing this :-)). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Ouyang, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> "Signed-off-by" should be added by himself, because the one who > >>>>>> in the Signed-off-by list should take responsibility for it(like > >>>>>> potential > >>>> bugs/issues). > >>>>>> Although, lots of patches are originate from Stephen, we still > >>>>>> need himself add this line :) > >>>>> Hi Thomas, > >>>>> It that right? I can't add Stephen into Signed-off-by list even if > >>>>> I have gotten the agreement from Stephen, What 's the strict rule > here? > >>>> Stephen sent the patches with his Signed-off, then you added yours. > >>>> This is OK. > >>>> Using git am, author would have been Stephen. To change author now, > >>>> you can edit each commit with interactive rebase and "git commit > >>>> --amend -- author=3DStephen". > >>>> No need to resend now. Please check it for next version of the > patchset. > >>>> > >>> So I understand correctly, Stephen need care for from patches from 1 > >>> to 16, I need care for the 17th patch from next version. > >>> What I mean "caring for" above is: debug and validate them and send > >>> out patches > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> Changchun > >>> > >> Just to clarify Thomas point here about use of "git am". If you get a > >> patch from someone to test or work on, use "git am" to apply it, > >> rather than "git apply", since "git am" generates a commit in your > >> local repo and thereby maintains the original authorship of the > >> patch. If you do "git apply" and subsequently commit yourself, you - > >> rather than the original author - will appear as the "author" of the > >> patch, and you need to amend the commit as Thomas suggests to fix this= . > >> > >> So in short: > >> * git am =3D=3D good > >> * git apply =3D=3D bad > > Thanks very much for the clarification. I will use git am for next vers= ion. >=20 > BTW, you also can use "git am ./xx/*" to patch a series patch set to your= local > git tree. Ok, thanks for sharing. =20 Thanks and regards,, Changchun