From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e23smtp02.au.ibm.com (e23smtp02.au.ibm.com [202.81.31.144]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2209F6A87 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 04:12:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from /spool/local by e23smtp02.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 12:19:09 +1000 Received: from d23dlp02.au.ibm.com (202.81.31.213) by e23smtp02.au.ibm.com (202.81.31.208) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 12:19:08 +1000 Received: from d23relay07.au.ibm.com (d23relay07.au.ibm.com [9.190.26.37]) by d23dlp02.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F10262BB0040 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 12:19:06 +1000 (EST) Received: from d23av05.au.ibm.com (d23av05.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.119]) by d23relay07.au.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id s8U2KgPg25165978 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 12:20:42 +1000 Received: from d23av05.au.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d23av05.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id s8U2J6Q1003025 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 12:19:06 +1000 Received: from d23ml028.cn.ibm.com (d23ml028.cn.ibm.com [9.119.32.184]) by d23av05.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id s8U2J5eV003003; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 12:19:05 +1000 In-Reply-To: <20140929152409.GF26483@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> References: <1411724018-7738-1-git-send-email-bjzhuc@cn.ibm.com> <1411724018-7738-2-git-send-email-bjzhuc@cn.ibm.com> <20140929110522.GF12072@BRICHA3-MOBL> <20140929152409.GF26483@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> To: Neil Horman , Bruce Richardson MIME-Version: 1.0 X-KeepSent: ED7ECC6D:A13BD9C9-48257D63:000C5BB8; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: IBM Notes Release 9.0.1SHF211 December 19, 2013 Message-ID: From: Chao CH Zhu Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:18:01 +0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on d23ml028/23/M/IBM(Release 8.5.3FP6HF485 | May 7, 2014) at 09/30/2014 10:18:03, Serialize complete at 09/30/2014 10:18:03 X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 14093002-0005-0000-0000-000000C4459E Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/7] Split atomic operations to architecture specific 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, 30 Sep 2014 02:12:36 -0000 QnJ1Y2UgYW5kIE5laWwsDQoNClRoYW5rcyBmb3IgeW91ciBjb21tZW50cyEgQWN0dWFsbHksIHRo ZSBjb21waWxlciBoaWRlcyB0aGUgZGlmZmVyZW5jZSB3aXRoIA0KZGlmZmVyZW50IGFyY2hpdGVj dHVyZS4NCkknbGwgc3VibWl0IGFub3RoZXIgcGF0Y2ggdG8gY29ycmVjdCB0aGlzIQ0KDQoNCkJl c3QgUmVnYXJkcyENCi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KQ2hhbyBaaHUgKNej s6wpDQpSZXNlYXJjaCBTdGFmZiBNZW1iZXINCkNsb3VkIEluZnJhc3RydWN0dXJlIGFuZCBUZWNo bm9sb2d5IEdyb3VwDQpJQk0gQ2hpbmEgUmVzZWFyY2ggTGFiDQpCdWlsZGluZyAxOSBaaG9uZ2d1 YW5jdW4gU29mdHdhcmUgUGFyaw0KOCBEb25nYmVpd2FuZyBXZXN0IFJvYWQsIEhhaWRpYW4gRGlz dHJpY3QsDQpCZWlqaW5nLCBQUkMuIDEwMDE5Mw0KVGVsOiArODYtMTAtNTg3NDg3MTENCkVtYWls OiBianpodWNAY24uaWJtLmNvbQ0KDQoNCg0KDQpGcm9tOiAgIE5laWwgSG9ybWFuIDxuaG9ybWFu QHR1eGRyaXZlci5jb20+DQpUbzogICAgIEJydWNlIFJpY2hhcmRzb24gPGJydWNlLnJpY2hhcmRz b25AaW50ZWwuY29tPg0KQ2M6ICAgICBDaGFvIENIIFpodS9DaGluYS9JQk1ASUJNQ04sIGRldkBk cGRrLm9yZw0KRGF0ZTogICAyMDE0LzA5LzI5IDIzOjIzDQpTdWJqZWN0OiAgICAgICAgUmU6IFtk cGRrLWRldl0gW1BBVENIIDEvN10gU3BsaXQgYXRvbWljIG9wZXJhdGlvbnMgdG8gDQphcmNoaXRl Y3R1cmUgc3BlY2lmaWMNCg0KDQoNCk9uIE1vbiwgU2VwIDI5LCAyMDE0IGF0IDEyOjA1OjIyUE0g KzAxMDAsIEJydWNlIFJpY2hhcmRzb24gd3JvdGU6DQo+IE9uIEZyaSwgU2VwIDI2LCAyMDE0IGF0 IDA1OjMzOjMyQU0gLTA0MDAsIENoYW8gWmh1IHdyb3RlOg0KPiA+IFRoaXMgcGF0Y2ggc3BsaXRz IHRoZSBhdG9taWMgb3BlcmF0aW9ucyBmcm9tIERQREsgYW5kIHB1c2ggdGhlbSB0bw0KPiA+IGFy Y2hpdGVjdHVyZSBzcGVjaWZpYyBhcmNoIGRpcmVjdG9yaWVzLCBzbyB0aGF0IG90aGVyIHByb2Nl c3Nvcg0KPiA+IGFyY2hpdGVjdHVyZSB0byBzdXBwb3J0IERQREsgY2FuIGJlIGVhc2lseSBhZG9w dGVkLg0KPiA+IA0KPiA+IFNpZ25lZC1vZmYtYnk6IENoYW8gWmh1IDxianpodWNAY24uaWJtLmNv bT4NCj4gPiAtLS0NCj4gPiAgbGliL2xpYnJ0ZV9lYWwvY29tbW9uL01ha2VmaWxlICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgfCAgICAyICstDQo+ID4gIC4uLi9jb21tb24vaW5jbHVkZS9pNjg2L2FyY2gv cnRlX2F0b21pY19hcmNoLmggICAgIHwgIDM3OCANCisrKysrKysrKysrKysrKysrKysrDQo+ID4g IGxpYi9saWJydGVfZWFsL2NvbW1vbi9pbmNsdWRlL3J0ZV9hdG9taWMuaCAgICAgICAgIHwgIDE3 MiArLS0tLS0tLS0NCj4gPiAgLi4uL2NvbW1vbi9pbmNsdWRlL3g4Nl82NC9hcmNoL3J0ZV9hdG9t aWNfYXJjaC5oICAgfCAgMzc4IA0KKysrKysrKysrKysrKysrKysrKysNCj4gPiAgNCBmaWxlcyBj aGFuZ2VkLCA3NzIgaW5zZXJ0aW9ucygrKSwgMTU4IGRlbGV0aW9ucygtKQ0KPiA+ICBjcmVhdGUg bW9kZSAxMDA2NDQgDQpsaWIvbGlicnRlX2VhbC9jb21tb24vaW5jbHVkZS9pNjg2L2FyY2gvcnRl X2F0b21pY19hcmNoLmgNCj4gPiAgY3JlYXRlIG1vZGUgMTAwNjQ0IA0KbGliL2xpYnJ0ZV9lYWwv Y29tbW9uL2luY2x1ZGUveDg2XzY0L2FyY2gvcnRlX2F0b21pY19hcmNoLmgNCj4gPiANCj4gPC4u LnNuaXAuLi4+DQo+ID4gKyNkZWZpbmUgICAgICAgICAgICAgcnRlX2NvbXBpbGVyX2JhcnJpZXIo KSANCnJ0ZV9hcmNoX2NvbXBpbGVyX2JhcnJpZXIoKQ0KPiANCj4gU21hbGwgcXVlc3Rpb246IHNo b3VsZG4ndCB0aGUgY29tcGlsZXIgYmFycmllciBiZSBpbmRlcGVuZGVudCBvZiANCj4gYXJjaGl0 ZWN0dXJlPw0KPiANCkFncmVlZCwgY29tcGlsZXIgaW50cmluc2ljcyBJIHRob3VnaHQgd2VyZSB1 c2VkIHRvIGRlZmluZSBiYXJyaWVycywgDQpyZWdhcmRsZXNzDQpvZiBhcmNoIChfX21lbW9yeV9i YXJyaWVyKCkgaXMgdGhlIGdjYyBpbnRyaW5zaWMgSUlSQykNCk5laWwNCg0KPiAvQnJ1Y2UNCj4g DQo+IA0KDQoNCg0K >From huawei.xie@intel.com Tue Sep 30 04:34:54 2014 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F22855902 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 04:34:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from azsmga001.ch.intel.com ([10.2.17.19]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 29 Sep 2014 19:41:31 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,624,1406617200"; d="scan'208";a="480883633" Received: from fmsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.205]) by azsmga001.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 29 Sep 2014 19:41:30 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx114.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.8) by fmsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.205) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 19:41:30 -0700 Received: from shsmsx104.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.4.70) by FMSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 19:41:30 -0700 Received: from shsmsx101.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.203]) by SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.230]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:41:22 +0800 From: "Xie, Huawei" To: Thomas Monjalon Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 05/11] lib/librte_vhost: merge Oliver's mbuf change Thread-Index: AQHP3B3Ts2Zmxo5h6kuMpa16GYv4yJwY9BnA Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 02:41:21 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1411724758-27488-1-git-send-email-huawei.xie@intel.com> <1411724758-27488-6-git-send-email-huawei.xie@intel.com> <9382804.Ypo5if4EZ6@xps13> In-Reply-To: <9382804.Ypo5if4EZ6@xps13> Accept-Language: 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] [PATCH v5 05/11] lib/librte_vhost: merge Oliver's mbuf change 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, 30 Sep 2014 02:34:54 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 3:44 AM > To: Xie, Huawei > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 05/11] lib/librte_vhost: merge Oliver's= mbuf > change >=20 > > There is no rte_pktmbuf structure in mbuf now. Its fields are merged to > > rte_mbuf structure. > > > > Signed-off-by: Huawei Xie >=20 > This patch shouldn't appear but should be merged with your previous work. >=20 > -- > Thomas Hi Thomas: I would rework the patch according to your comment. I don't get clear about this comment. Do you mean that recreate the patch s= et based on the example that already has this mbuf change? Some of the background you might not know: I fully understand your concern here to make it a better patch and I fully = agree with you total comments.=20 This is really a special case. You know it is transform of thousand lines o= f code with modifications. Sometimes a simple change could take me more than one day to rework the pat= ch, lines of lines manual check.=20 I have already spent more than one week of time merely on the patch format= itself. :(. =20 =20 Could we possibly treat it specially when we have comment whether the patch= can be split/merged better?=20