Hi Connor and Ferruh,
On 2023-06-19 09:57:17 +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 6/16/2023 1:00 PM, humin (Q) wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > 在 2023/6/16 15:20, Chaoyong He 写道:
> >> From: Zerun Fu <zerun...@corigine.com>
> >>
> >> After the mainline Linux kernel commit
> >> "fe205d984e7730f4d21f6f8ebc60f0698404ac31" (ACPI: Remove side effect
> >> of partly creating a node in acpi_map_pxm_to_online_node) by
> >> Jonathan Cameron. When the system does not support NUMA architecture,
> >> the "socket_id" is expected to be -1. The valid "socket_id" in
> >> BOND PMD is greater than or equal to zero. So it will cause an error
> >> when DPDK checks the validity of the "socket_id" when starting the
> >> bond. This commit can fix this bug.
> >>
> >> Fixes: f294e04851fd ("net/bonding: fix socket ID check")
> >> Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Zerun Fu <zerun...@corigine.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Peng Zhang <peng.zh...@corigine.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Chaoyong He <chaoyong...@corigine.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Long Wu <long...@corigine.com>
> >
> > No need add your colleagues unless they "reviwed-by" through email-list.
> >
>
> Hi Connor,
>
> This is done time to time, if code is already internally reviewed, send
> review/ack tags within the patch, to reduce noise in the mail list.
This is the reason why patches from us usually have 1 or 2 R-b tags when
we post to the list. We have an internal review and CI pipeline we run
patches thru to reduce the noise at the list and to not waste upstream
review resources.
We follow the DPDK workflow internally before we submit patches to the
public mailing list. I hope we can continue to do so and add R-b tags,
as they represent real effort by the developers.
>
> It looks like there were additional reviewers of code, which is good,
> but it requires maintainers' (you and Chas) ack to get accepted.
>
--
Kind Regards,
Niklas Söderlund
