-----Original Message----- > Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2017 13:01:47 +0000 > From: "Van Haaren, Harry" <harry.van.haa...@intel.com> > To: Jerin Jacob <jerin.ja...@caviumnetworks.com> > CC: "olivier.m...@6wind.com" <olivier.m...@6wind.com>, "Richardson, Bruce" > <bruce.richard...@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/5] event/sw: change worker rings to > standard event rings > > > rings > > > > > > > > Now that we have a standard event ring implementation for passing events > > > > core-to-core, use that in place of the custom event rings in the > > > > software > > > > eventdev. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richard...@intel.com> > > > > > > Agree with 99% of this patch, but due to the implementation (with memzone > > > lookup), > > > we need to change one part of the sw_port_setup() function. > > > > > > The change is required to allow port_setup() to be called multiple times > > > on the same > > > port, which is required to re-configure a port that has already been > > > configured once. > > > > > > I can send a separate fix, or I could re-spin Bruce's 5 patches, and > > > include the fix. > > > > > > Given this is a small, non-datapath modification to the SW PMD, my > > > preference is to > > > ack this patch once I've posted a separate patch fix for the SW PMD. > > > > > > @Jerin, any preference? > > > > I think, you can send it as a separate patch. I can squash the fix patch > > with this > > patch or apply it as separate one if you are not concerned about > > breaking when we do "git bisect". Let me know. > > Can be squashed then, please and thanks! > > Then this patch itself (5/5) is > > Acked-by: Harry van Haaren <harry.van.haa...@intel.com>
Applied this series to dpdk-next-eventdev/master after squashing http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/26241/ Thanks
