[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/5] event/sw: change worker rings to standard event rings

[Van Haaren, Harry]

> From: Jerin Jacob [mailto:jerin.jacob at caviumnetworks.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 1:45 PM
> To: Van Haaren, Harry <harry.van.haaren at intel.com>
> Cc: olivier.matz at 6wind.com; Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/5] event/sw: change worker rings to standard event
> rings
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> > Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2017 12:28:32 +0000
> > From: "Van Haaren, Harry" <harry.van.haaren at intel.com>
> > To: "jerin.jacob at caviumnetworks.com" <jerin.jacob at caviumnetworks.com>
> > CC: "olivier.matz at 6wind.com" <olivier.matz at 6wind.com>, "Richardson, Bruce"
> >  <bruce.richardson at intel.com>, "dev at dpdk.org" <dev at dpdk.org>, "Richardson,
> >  Bruce" <bruce.richardson at intel.com>
> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/5] event/sw: change worker rings to
> >  standard	event rings
> >
> > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Richardson
> > > Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 4:06 PM
> > > To: dev at dpdk.org
> > > Cc: olivier.matz at 6wind.com; jerin.jacob at caviumnetworks.com; Richardson, Bruce
> > > <bruce.richardson at intel.com>
> > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/5] event/sw: change worker rings to standard event
> 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.richardson at 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.haaren at intel.com>