On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 08:15:47AM +0000, Iremonger, Bernard wrote: > Hi John, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: John W. Linville [mailto:linville at tuxdriver.com] > > Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 6:44 PM > > To: Iremonger, Bernard > > Cc: dev at dpdk.org > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/6] remove pci driver from vdevs > > > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 04:40:35PM +0100, Bernard Iremonger wrote: > > > There is a dummy pci driver in the vdev PMD's at present. > > > This RFC proposes to remove the pci driver from the vdev PMD's. > > > Changes have been made to librte_ether to handle vdevs which do not > > have a pci driver. > > > > > > The pdev PMD's should work as before with the changes to librte_ether > > > The vdev PMD's which still have a pci driver should work as before with > > > the > > librte_ether changes. > > > > > > The following vdev PMD's have had the pci driver removed > > > > > > bonding PMD > > > null PMD > > > pcap PMD > > > ring PMD > > > > Any reason there is no patch for the af_packet driver? > > > > John > > I have just modified the Intel vdev PMD's. > It would be best if the owners of the non Intel vdev's submitted patches for > their drivers. > I disagree. Its ok given that this is an RFC patch I suppose, but if you intend to actually propose this change for review, you need to modify all affected drivers in a single commit. Asking individual driver maintainers to submit patches to not access a struct element that is removed in a separate patch will by definition cause FTBFS errors. All references to the structure member being removed must also be eliminated in the same or a prior commit, preferably the former.
Neil > Regards, > > Bernard. > > <snip> > >