Hi Rasesh,
On 12/3/2016 6:35 AM, Rasesh Mody wrote:
> Fixes: ec94dbc5 ("qede: add base driver")
>
> Signed-off-by: Rasesh Mody <rasesh.m...@cavium.com>
Related to the commit logs of this patchset. Many people, including me,
won't know technical details of your driver as you do.
>From below patch, I also can see vendor_id and device_id get, which were
not there before. But I have no clue why? Or what happens when you don't
have them, or what works fine when you have them.
Overall a little context helps a lot to understand what is really fixed,
and what happens if not fixed.
For example in patch 8/8, it is a one line easy modification :), but
there is no way that I can understand what really it does, but commit
log comes to help there, and describes it really fixes VF over legacy
PF, by VF asking a FW overwrite instead of failing on PF reject msg. So
patch subject can be here: fix VF over legacy PF.
Please trying to provide more context on fixes.
Also you need to add CC:sta...@dpdk.org to commit log, so that git
send-email ensures this fixes also sent to stable trees.
Thanks,
> ---
> drivers/net/qede/qede_ethdev.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/qede/qede_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/qede/qede_ethdev.c
> index 9c2a5eae..b9a325df 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/qede/qede_ethdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/qede/qede_ethdev.c
> @@ -2071,6 +2071,10 @@ static int qede_common_dev_init(struct rte_eth_dev
> *eth_dev, bool is_vf)
>
> rte_eth_copy_pci_info(eth_dev, pci_dev);
>
> + /* @DPDK */
> + edev->vendor_id = pci_dev->id.vendor_id;
> + edev->device_id = pci_dev->id.device_id;
> +
> qed_ops = qed_get_eth_ops();
> if (!qed_ops) {
> DP_ERR(edev, "Failed to get qed_eth_ops_pass\n");
>
