Hi Stephen, > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon > Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2016 3:21 PM > To: Doherty, Declan <declan.doherty at intel.com> > Cc: dev at dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 6/8] bond: handle slaves with fewer queues > than bonding device > > 2016-02-03 15:17, Declan Doherty: > > On 03/02/16 11:28, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > > Hi Eric, Stephen, Declan, > > > > > > all patches of the set apart from this one and the next (nos 6 & 7) > > > have no comments and have been acked. Is there a resolution on these > > > two patches, so they can be acked and merged? > > > > Hey Bruce, Eric, Stephen, sorry about leaving this patchset hanging > > around. Can you apply patches 1-5 & patch 8 in this patch set. I've > > reviewed and acked all of those patches and I believe they are good > > tof go. I need to give further feedback on patches 6 and 7, as I would > > like to avoid bring further rte_ring buffering into the bonded device > > if possible and I think this should be possible but I haven't had time > > to prototype any alternatives but that shouldn't stop the other > > patches being applied. > > Picking some patches in a series makes tracking confusing. > The better solution is to re-send the series with only the desired patches. > When re-sending, do not forget to embed the acks from the previous > version, thanks.
Could you send a V2 of this patch set without patches 6 and 7. The other 6 patches have been acked already. Regards, Bernard.
