Hi, One question about this patch. I will send another patch soon which will require to modify the file created by this patch. So, should I use the dpdk-next for sending the new patch or the dpdk stable branch? I understand that using the latter will imply some integration later, but I really do not know if I should facilitate things using dpdk-next in this case.
By the way, it is not just about this specific patch, because I have other almost ready which I want to push before the 16.02 deadline. On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 11:36 AM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> wrote: > On 12/9/2016 10:00 AM, Alejandro Lucero wrote: > > That's fine. > > Applied to dpdk-next-net/master, thanks. > > > > > Thank you > > > > On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com > > <mailto:ferruh.yi...@intel.com>> wrote: > > > > On 12/6/2016 2:51 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote: > > > Then I guess I should send another version of this patch. > > > > I can also update the patch while applying, if you agree with > following > > content (simply just all =N removed): > > > > [Features] > > +SR-IOV = Y > > +Link status = Y > > +Link status event = Y > > +Queue start/stop = Y > > +MTU update = Y > > +Jumbo frame = Y > > +RSS hash = Y > > +RSS key update = Y > > +RSS reta update = Y > > +Flow control = Y > > +VLAN offload = Y > > +L3 checksum offload = Y > > +L4 checksum offload = Y > > +Promiscuous mode = Y > > +Basic stats = Y > > +Stats per queue = Y > > +Linux UIO = Y > > +Linux VFIO = Y > > +x86-64 = Y > > +Usage doc = Y > > > > > > > >
