David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com> writes: > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 3:22 PM Haiyue Wang <haiyue.w...@intel.com> wrote: >> >> A DCF (Device Config Function) based approach is proposed where a device >> bound to the device's VF0 can act as a sole controlling entity to exercise >> advance functionality (such as switch, ACL) for rest of the VFs. >> >> The DCF works as a standalone PMD to support this function, which shares the >> ice PMD flow control core function and the iavf virtchnl mailbox core module. >> >> This patchset is based on: >> [1] https://patchwork.dpdk.org/cover/66417/ update ice base code > > The problem is that the CI(s) won't handle this. > Example for the robot: https://travis-ci.com/ovsrobot/dpdk/builds/152461907 > > Maybe we could add something as an annotation to the cover letter or > the first patch of a series so that the CI(s) can detect and try to be > intelligent?
It's something that's possibly worth doing; I can update the bot to recognize: series_XXX in the cover-letter metadata (IE: between the '[...]'), and automatically check out the correct branch. Additionally, if the idea is not to get the patch applied right away while finalizing on the preceding series, the RFC keyword will prevent the bot from running. THAT SAID In general, I dislike posting series that depend on other series. It makes review much harder, and if there's a feedback on the preceding series that requires lots of change, the dependent series may also need to be re-done completely. I see there are more replies to this thread - sorry I didn't get to it yesterday (personal stuff).
