> -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com] > Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 9:54 AM > To: Ananyev, Konstantin > Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Marc Sune; Lu, Wenzhuo; Zhang, Helin; Harish Patil; > Chen, Jing D; Mcnamara, John > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/5] ethdev: redesign link speed config API > > 2016-01-29 09:47, Ananyev, Konstantin: > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com] > > > 2016-01-29 09:24, Ananyev, Konstantin: > > > > Can you avoid modifications in the e1000/base code? > > > > We do not modify (and maintain) that part on our own. > > > > Instead we take it straight from Intel ND. > > > > So if you feel like these changes are really necessary - please submit > > > > a patch > > > > to ND first, and if your changes will be applied, will pick it up from > > > > them. > > > > > > I was not aware we can submit a change to ND for Intel base drivers. > > > What is the procedure please? > > > > I meant not to the ND directly, but probably to the freebsd e1000 kernel > > driver. > > As I remember, that is the closest one to what we have. > > From my understanding (I might be wrong here): > > If they will be accepted, we should see these changes In next code drops > > from ND. > > These base drivers are used in several places. > We are allowed to submit a patch in Linux or FreeBSD but not in DPDK > where the base driver is verbatim?
Yes, that's my understanding. > We have an agreement to not touch them in DPDK Yes. > but I still think the > ND team could consider some patches from dpdk.org. I personally think that would be a good thing, but it is up to ND guys to make such decision. Konstantin
