From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] bond: handle slaves with fewer queues than bonding device Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2016 16:21:12 +0100 Message-ID: <2402415.75bQrkATMT@xps13> References: <1449249260-15165-1-git-send-email-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20160203112854.GA13036@bricha3-MOBL3> <56B219EF.7040105@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Declan Doherty Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com (mail-wm0-f51.google.com [74.125.82.51]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C212E56B7 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2016 16:22:26 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f51.google.com with SMTP id 128so170519509wmz.1 for ; Wed, 03 Feb 2016 07:22:26 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <56B219EF.7040105@intel.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 2016-02-03 15:17, Declan Doherty: > On 03/02/16 11:28, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > Hi Eric, Stephen, Declan, > > > > all patches of the set apart from this one and the next (nos 6 & 7) have no > > comments and have been acked. Is there a resolution on these two patches, so they > > can be acked and merged? > > Hey Bruce, Eric, Stephen, sorry about leaving this patchset hanging > around. Can you apply patches 1-5 & patch 8 in this patch set. I've > reviewed and acked all of those patches and I believe they are good tof > go. I need to give further feedback on patches 6 and 7, as I would like > to avoid bring further rte_ring buffering into the bonded device if > possible and I think this should be possible but I haven't had time to > prototype any alternatives but that shouldn't stop the other patches > being applied. Picking some patches in a series makes tracking confusing. The better solution is to re-send the series with only the desired patches. When re-sending, do not forget to embed the acks from the previous version, thanks.