09/03/2020 17:20, Ye Xiaolong:
> Hi, David
>
> On 03/09, David Marchand wrote:
> >On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 3:22 PM Haiyue Wang <haiyue.w...@intel.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> A DCF (Device Config Function) based approach is proposed where a device
> >> bound to the device's VF0 can act as a sole controlling entity to exercise
> >> advance functionality (such as switch, ACL) for rest of the VFs.
> >>
> >> The DCF works as a standalone PMD to support this function, which shares
> >> the
> >> ice PMD flow control core function and the iavf virtchnl mailbox core
> >> module.
> >>
> >> This patchset is based on:
> >> [1] https://patchwork.dpdk.org/cover/66417/ update ice base code
> >
> >The problem is that the CI(s) won't handle this.
> >Example for the robot: https://travis-ci.com/ovsrobot/dpdk/builds/152461907
> >
> >Maybe we could add something as an annotation to the cover letter or
> >the first patch of a series so that the CI(s) can detect and try to be
> >intelligent?
>
> Agree, It'd be helpful if the cover letter of the first patch contains some
> base tree info including the base commit and dependency patchset info (if
> any),
> so the CI can determine the correct base on top of which the developer's
> patchset applies to avoid any apply issue and potential false positive.
>
> And I know there is one option '--base'' of `git format-patch` which is
> dedicated for this kind of usage, it can help create the base tree info block
> which can be easily consumed by the CI. Here is the simple intro of it.
>
> Imagine that on top of the public commit P (already in upstream), the
> developer
> applied well-known (on-flight, in the mailing list but not merged yet) patches
> X, Y and Z from somebody else or himself, and then built his three-patch
> series
> A, B, C, the commit history would be like:
>
> ................................................
> ---P---X---Y---Z---A---B---C
> ................................................
>
> With `git format-patch --base=P -3 C`,
>
> where P could be the exact commit sha, or variants e.g. HEAD~6, we can also
> use
> --base=auto for convenience, the base tree information block will be shown at
> the end of the first message the command outputs (either the first patch, or
> the cover letter), like this:
>
> ------------
> base-commit: P
> prerequisite-patch-id: X
> prerequisite-patch-id: Y
> prerequisite-patch-id: Z
> ------------
>
> Here P is the commit sha, and X,Y,Z are the patch ids of the dependency
> patches.
>
>
> With this info in place, I think CI should be able to setup the exact base for
> the coming patchset, the missing part I can see is the mapping of
> (in-flight patch <-> patch id), since we have all the in-flight patches in
> patchwork, creating and maintaining such mapping in DB is doable, what do you
> think?
I think it would simpler to list dependencies as patchwork ids.
Example:
Depends-on: series-42, patch-12345
