From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] vhost: optimize enqueue
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 18:11:06 +0800
Message-ID: <20161014101106.GE16751@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
References: <8F6C2BD409508844A0EFC19955BE09414E7B5581@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <CAP4Qi39-KD8pY-3M31asoDV+dja27XzFTsBMq9ignoawdL8=HQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160922022903.GJ23158@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <CAP4Qi392=aOMrSyTu-5qwpSLpwK-NVdHp-aztT-xT=BcRPWoew@mail.gmail.com>
 <20161012025307.GG16751@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <8F6C2BD409508844A0EFC19955BE09414E7CD78E@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <20161013053324.GP16751@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <8F6C2BD409508844A0EFC19955BE09414E7CDDC7@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <76ec0b90-3748-e3c0-abbb-257570086268@redhat.com>
 <570cc934-590e-8770-9853-f03a1380d181@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: "Wang, Zhihong" <zhihong.wang@intel.com>,
 Jianbo Liu <jianbo.liu@linaro.org>,
 Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 928E658D8
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 12:10:14 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <570cc934-590e-8770-9853-f03a1380d181@redhat.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 11:23:44AM +0200, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
> I was going to re-run some PVP benchmark with 0% pkt loss, as I had
> some strange results last week.
> 
> Problem is that your series no more apply cleanly due to
> next-virtio's master branch history rewrite.
> Any chance you send me a rebased version so that I can apply the series?

I think it's pointless to do that now: it won't be merged after all.
We have refactored out the new series, please help review if you
got time :)

BTW, apologize that I forgot to include your Reviewed-by for the
first patch. I intended to do that ...

	--yliu