04/07/2017 11:21, santosh: > > On Tuesday 04 July 2017 02:33 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > 04/07/2017 09:57, santosh: > >> Hi Thomas, > >> > >> On Tuesday 04 July 2017 12:49 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > >> > >>> 04/07/2017 06:41, santosh: > >>>> Ping? > >>> You should try to ping Sergio, memory maintainer, > >>> and Anatoly, VFIO maintainer. > >>> > >>> Given that > >>> - there is no review at all, > >> By default if no review then its maintainer responsibility to review Or > >> ask someone to review? > > Yes, but it is also the responsibility of the author. > > To review my own code? Or if its about pinging then you already picked and > asked list for review comment then why should I spam list by sending ping?
Not reviewing your own code :) Yes you're right, I've tried to ping. People do not make a lot of reviews. That's where we need more help. There would be no problem if everyone waiting for a review were reviewing some patches from others. > >> BTW: Who is the bus maintainer? I don't see entry in MAINTAINER file. > > Bus code is new and there is no maintainer yet. > > then else you expect from author? Yes, there are several authors of the bus rework. > >>> - it is conflicting with the bus/PCI rework in progress, > >>> it will not be considered for 17.08. > >> We're adding only two new iommu_class bus api in rte_bus, I'm not sure > >> about conflict. If there is conflict then I should see review comment for > >> same in my patch set? > > It is mostly a time conflict. > > I have not been told about that, so how author get to know. I could understand > code conflict , Can you suggest how to align and address time conflict, how > author could address time conflict? You could try to make other patches touching bus code to be reviewed, so integrated faster. > >> This initiatives came out from [1], and we put lot of effort in > > You forgot the [1] reference. > > http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/24549/ > > If we're upto taking short cut then simply requested to push -iova-va as eal > arg > but intent was to address in a proper way .. propose framework. That takes > effort > and time!. Yes, I understand. It is a big work, and it may take time to be properly reviewed. It happens that we cannot get others working with us in the right timeframe. I try to coordinate but sometimes there are some fails. We can still try to speed things up and see what happens. > >> breaking down api from bus till library layer. This framework indeed > >> a need for those platform which cares for iova=va like octeontx, dpaa2 and > >> perhaps many future SoCs. W/o this framework, we can't get pktio working > >> for octeontx ethdev > >> in dpdk, can't get HW pool manager working for Octeontx offload blocks. > >> > >> I agree that I missed on sergio or Anatoly But crux of design is rte_bus > >> layer. I expect comment on those area, right? > >> > >> And if we have consent on bus approach then rest changes are trivial. > >> > >> I didn't ping before as You had picked my patch set and asked for review > >> comment in past. > >> > >> Can we include it in RC2? Because it will delay upstreaming effort of > >> octeontx ethdev driver > >> and other dependent driver for us. > > This series is touching to many parts of DPDK. > > It really depends on maintainers of malloc, mempool and vfio. > > You are missing a point and this why a review feedback on crux of rte_bus > design was essential. if we agreed on rte_xx_iova_mode() then changes > at malloc/mempool and vfio is trivial or could have thought upon way to > address in simpler way. > And if there is disagreement then drop this approach. Provided if someone has > better solution. > For that review comment on rte_bus changes a must. > > > I'm also afraid your cover letter is too difficult to understand, > > because most of us do not know the acronyms you are talking about. > > I will comment on it. > > Which is part not understood? can you please elaborate on details? How would > author come to know about that? Do I need to send patches to some other list > where > most of folks review? Santosh, please do not blame me, I cannot review everything on the mailing list. I am going to ask questions in order to make this cover letter easier to understand.
