On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 01:26:09PM +0000, Wiles, Keith wrote: > > > On Sep 12, 2017, at 8:24 AM, Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com> > > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 02:21:22PM +0100, Wiles, Keith wrote: > >> > >>> On Sep 12, 2017, at 5:37 AM, Bruce Richardson > >>> <bruce.richard...@intel.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> V2 changes: > >>> * fixed copyright notices, updated 2016 to 2017 > >>> * removed dependency on kconfig file in kernel build tree > >>> * marked pmdinfogen as a "native" binary, in preparation for future cross- > >>> compilation work > >>> * added in additional warning flags for compatibility with existing system > >>> —— > >> > >> > >>> Once reviewed and tested a bit, I hope to apply this set - or a new > >>> revision of it - to the build-next tree, to serve as a baseline for others > >>> to use and to add the missing functionality to. > >> > >> I would really like to see these patches in a build-next tree as it is > >> much easier to work with and help with changes then patches on the master. > >> > >> When can we have a build-next tree created? > >> > > Tree already exists. I'm just waiting on a bit more review and ideally > > an ack before I apply this set there. > > Not sure what you are waiting for as an ack is not going to make much of a > difference IMO :-) > Why would an ACK not make any difference? Are you suggesting that using this is a forgone conclusion?
Neil > > > > http://dpdk.org/browse/draft/dpdk-next-build/ > > > > /Bruce > > Regards, > Keith >
