Hi Thomas, Fine, I will do it.
One more question: You have comments as follow: The title was "[PATCH 0/3] [PMD] [VHOST] *** Support zero copy RX/TX in user space vhost ***" It should be "[PATCH v2 0/3] Support zero copy RX/TX in user space vhost" So "[PMD] [VHOST]" in the title should be removed in the cover letter, right? And in each separate patch letter, it could use "ixgbe:" or "examples/vhost:", instead of "[PMD] [VHOST]" Is it right? Thanks Changchun -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monja...@6wind.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:00 AM To: Ouyang, Changchun Cc: dev at dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] [PMD] [VHOST] Revert unnecessary definition and fix wrong referring in user space vhost zero copy patches Hi Changchun, 2014-05-19 23:09, Ouyang Changchun: > 1. Revert the change of metadata macro definition for referring to > headroom space in mbuf; 2. Fix wrongly referring to RX queues number > in TX queues start/stop function. > > Signed-off-by: Ouyang Changchun <changchun.ouyang at intel.com> You are fixing commits which are not yet applied. Please merge and re-send the whole serie by suffixing with "v2". The title was "[PATCH 0/3] [PMD] [VHOST] *** Support zero copy RX/TX in user space vhost ***" It should be "[PATCH v2 0/3] Support zero copy RX/TX in user space vhost" Other notes: - please split API and ixgbe changes - set a significant title to each patch - use prefixes like "ethdev:", "ixgbe:" or "examples/vhost:" In general, this page is a good help: http://dpdk.org/dev#send Thanks -- Thomas
