On 08/21/2017 10:23 AM, Yuanhan Liu wrote: > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 09:23:24AM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote: >>>> I think this one should go in too, as OVS hits this and writes back the >>>> wrong watermark value to the shared register which can cause problems >>>> for other ports. I've applied and tested it with DPDK 16.11. >>>> >>>> commit 0e61ab56e01655f02bfe4e6249e032e864b0f5dd >>>> Author: Qi Zhang <qi.z.zh...@intel.com> >>>> Date: Thu Aug 10 18:48:07 2017 +0800 >>>> >>>> net/i40e: fix flow control watermark mismatch >>>> >>>> Flow control watermark is not read out correctly, >>>> that may cause an application who not intend to change >>>> watermark but does change it with a rte_eth_dev_flow_ctrl_set >>>> call right after rte_eth_dev_flow_ctrl_get. >>> >>> Weird, I couldn't find this commit: >>> >>> $ git show 0e61ab56e01655f02bfe4e6249e032e864b0f5dd >>> fatal: bad object 0e61ab56e01655f02bfe4e6249e032e864b0f5dd >> >> The commit is in next-net. Not sure how to proceed, any idea? > > I see. Thanks. So it's not merged to Thomas tree yet. I normally take > commits from there. Because I add a tag like following every time I > pick a commit: > > [ upstream commit 5b9b65b14e05c106bb8229c0fe0b347315da7d00 ] >
oops, I didn't think about that :/ > If I take commits directly from next-* tree, the commit could have > been changed while merging to Thomas tree, for two reasons: > > - the next-* could have done a rebase > - we don't do "git merge" at Thomas tree > > > However, if that commit is urgent, I think I could make it for 16.11.3 > release with following tag: > > [ next-net commit 0e61ab56e01655f02bfe4e6249e032e864b0f5dd ] > > If not, I will postone it to 16.11.4. > > --yliu > Given that it took 9 months for the bug to be found, I think postponing to DPDK 16.11.4 is better than upsetting the dpdk-stable commit log to reference multiple repos. thanks, Kevin.
