[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/1] net/ixgbe: Add API to update SBP bit

[Shweta Choudaha]

Hi Helin, Qi, Wenzhuo,

   Any update for this patch.
Anything else needed or can this be merged ?

Thanks,
Shweta

On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit at intel.com>
wrote:

> On 4/26/2018 11:20 AM, Shweta Choudaha wrote:
> > Hi Ferruh/ Helin,
> >
> >   Anything else needed for this patch
> >
> > http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/37802/
> > Or can this be now acked  - Have addressed all comments so far.
>
> Hi Helin, Qi, Wenzhuo,
>
> Any more comment on patch?
> Please let me know if you prefer me getting this directly to next-net?
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shweta
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 4:58 PM, Shweta Choudaha <
> shweta.choudaha at gmail.com
> > <mailto:shweta.choudaha at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     Thanks for the review.
> >     I have sent an updated patch and will send patch to remove
> experimental from
> >     API for next release
> >
> >     Thanks,
> >     Shweta
> >
> >     On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 11:40 AM, Bruce Richardson
> >     <bruce.richardson at intel.com <mailto:bruce.richardson at intel.com>>
> wrote:
> >
> >         On Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 11:14:35AM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> >         > On 4/4/2018 3:25 AM, Lu, Wenzhuo wrote:
> >         > > Hi Shweta,
> >         > >
> >         > >
> >         > >> -----Original Message-----
> >         > >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org
> >         <mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org>] On Behalf Of Shweta Choudaha
> >         > >> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2018 7:59 PM
> >         > >> To: dev at dpdk.org <mailto:dev at dpdk.org>
> >         > >> Cc: shweta.choudaha at att.com <mailto:shweta.choudaha at att.com
> >
> >         > >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/1] net/ixgbe: Add API to
> update SBP bit
> >         > >>
> >         > >> From: Shweta Choudaha <shweta.choudaha at att.com
> >         <mailto:shweta.choudaha at att.com>>
> >         > >>
> >         > >> Add ixgbe API to enable SBP bit in FCTRL register to allow
> >         receiving packets
> >         > >> that may otherwise be considered length errors by ixgbe and
> dropped
> >         > >>
> >         > >> Signed-off-by: Shweta Choudaha <shweta.choudaha at att.com
> >         <mailto:shweta.choudaha at att.com>>
> >         > >> Reviewed-by: Chas Williams <chas3 at att.com <mailto:
> chas3 at att.com>>
> >         > >> Reviewed-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca at debian.org <mailto:
> bluca at debian.org>>
> >         > >> ---
> >         > >
> >         > >
> >         > >> --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/rte_pmd_ixgbe_version.map
> >         > >> +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/rte_pmd_ixgbe_version.map
> >         > >> @@ -52,3 +52,9 @@ DPDK_17.08 {
> >         > >>    rte_pmd_ixgbe_bypass_wd_timeout_show;
> >         > >>    rte_pmd_ixgbe_bypass_wd_timeout_store;
> >         > >>  } DPDK_17.05;
> >         > >> +
> >         > >> +EXPERIMENTAL {
> >         > >> +  global:
> >         > >> +
> >         > >> +  rte_pmd_ixgbe_upd_fctrl_sbp;
> >         > >> +} DPDK_17.08;
> >         > > The patch is fine except we should use 18.05 here.
> >         >
> >         > We have a rule to have an API as experimental for one release.
> >         >
> >         > Not sure about this rule covering the PMD specific APIs but by
> default
> >         it is, we
> >         > can discuss to have an exception for PMD APIs or not.
> >         >
> >         > After one release developer should send patch to remove
> experimental
> >         from API
> >         >
> >         +1 for following the process.
> >         I don't see why pmd-specific APIs should be a general exception.
> Any
> >         exceptions should be on an individual case-by-case basis IMHO
> >
> >
> >
>
>