Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-techboard] [PATCH] doc: update contribution guideline for dependent work

[Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>]

On 12/12/2017 7:54 AM, Olivier MATZ wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 02:26:34PM +0000, Mcnamara, John wrote:
>> From: Yigit, Ferruh
>>> Changing some part of the libraries but not updating all dependent code
>>> cause maintenance problems.
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>>>
>>
>>
>> integration testing.
>>>
>>> +* If changes effect other parts of the project, update all those parts as
>>> well unless updating requires special knowledge.
> 
> I feel that "requiring special knowledge" is a bit blury. 

Yes it is, but hard to define where to put the line. My point is if author has
enough knowledge to go and update dependent part, please do so.

> Shouldn't we add some
> examples? Typically, I'm thinking about changes in ethdev that imply updating
> the PMDs. Any opinion for this use case?

Overall many libraries to PMDs fit into this. eal/mbuf/ethdev -> PMD changes.

I think, the dynamic logging update in the other libraries and PMDs should be
done with the original patch, adding dynamic logging to any library doesn't
require library specific information, but agree this is more work.

For new ethdev offload method, I believe it fits into more gray area, it may be
possible to update PMDs to use new offloading method but some part PMDs can be
challenging.

Converting flow director filtering to the rte_flow filtering is something I
believe fair to expect from PMD owner instead of rte_flow author.

>