Hi Thomas, > > 2016-12-23 09:36, Ananyev, Konstantin: > > From: Michal Miroslaw [mailto:mirq-li...@rere.qmqm.pl] > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 06:48:52PM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > > > > I suppose that changes have to be inside: > > > > [PATCH v2] acl: allow zero verdict. > > > > > > The 'allow zero verdict' patch depends on this one if we are to not have > > > a breaking tests inbetween. > > > > Exactly, that's why I think they either has to be in one series of patches, > > with this one coming first and ' PATCH v2] acl: allow zero verdict' as the > > second one, > > or just merge them into one. > > No progress here. > Konstantin, do you ack this patch?
Yes, I do. I just thought that the author would resubmit it as part of ' PATCH v2] acl: allow zero verdict' to comply with DPDK patch submission rules. Konstantin > I could apply it as a standalone patch.
