[dpdk-stable] patch 'net/ixgbe/base: fix IXGBE LSWFW register' has been queued to stable release 16.11.1

[Yuanhan Liu]

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 08:14:08AM +0000, Dai, Wei wrote:
> Hi, Yuanhan
> 
> Remove the mail list.

Add it back.

> Each time we updated NIC shared code, we always submitted a patch set including multiple patches.
> I notice that only patch with "fix" are applied into stable release.
> I am not sure the NIC can work well without other patches without "fix".
> Indeed the users like STV team always apply whole patch set for shared code update.
> They regards the patch set as whole one.
> So why not apply whole patch set for NIC shared code in stable release ?

Dai Wei, that's really a good question! And it deserves more discussion,
thus more people are cc'ed.

Firstly, to answer your question: it's not proper to apply all patches.
Stable tree is meant to apply bug fixes only. Applying all of them looks
more like backporting a feature, which is too risk for a stable release.

OTOH, if we apply some base fixes, doesn't it mean user also has to do
firmware update? If so, that doesn't sound good to me. I think we should
avoid asking user to do firmware update for a LTS. Correct me if I'm
wrong.

Maybe we could start with a simple rule first: no base fixes are allowed
for a stable release, unless
- they fixed some severe bugs, AND
- the author can make sure that these fix doesn't require firmware
  update and will not break anything.

Does that sound reasonable?

	--yliu

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Yuanhan Liu [mailto:yuanhan.liu at linux.intel.com]
> > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 3:47 PM
> > To: Dai, Wei <wei.dai at intel.com>
> > Cc: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu at linux.intel.com>; dpdk stable <stable at dpdk.org>
> > Subject: patch 'net/ixgbe/base: fix IXGBE LSWFW register' has been queued to
> > stable release 16.11.1
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > FYI, your patch has been queued to stable release 16.11.1
> > 
> > Note it hasn't been pushed to http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable
> > yet. It will be pushed if I get no objections before 01/28/17.
> > So please shout if anyone has objections.
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> > Note 16.11 is a LTS release. v16.11.1 is planned to be released shortly (about
> > 2-3 weeks) after v17.02.
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> > Thanks.
> > 
> > 	--yliu
> > 
> > ---
> > From b8aa05644901c9f3e4c9aca04504b702b15043a9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > 2001
> > From: Wei Dai <wei.dai at intel.com>
> > Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 17:48:10 +0800
> > Subject: [PATCH] net/ixgbe/base: fix IXGBE LSWFW register
> > 
> > [ upstream commit 45f79aea9e4bce079bbfb86f8278c88633f299ee ]
> > 
> > This register was incorrect when compared to the data sheet.
> > Even though the driver doesn't currently use this register, it is better to fix it
> > upstream.
> > 
> > Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release")
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Wei Dai <wei.dai at intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_type.h | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_type.h
> > b/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_type.h
> > index 4982e03..a9b6914 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_type.h
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_type.h
> > @@ -1045,7 +1045,7 @@ struct ixgbe_dmac_config {
> >  #define IXGBE_FTFT		0x09400 /* 0x9400-0x97FC */
> >  #define IXGBE_METF(_i)		(0x05190 + ((_i) * 4)) /* 4 of these (0-3) */
> >  #define IXGBE_MDEF_EXT(_i)	(0x05160 + ((_i) * 4)) /* 8 of these (0-7) */
> > -#define IXGBE_LSWFW		0x15014
> > +#define IXGBE_LSWFW		0x15F14
> >  #define IXGBE_BMCIP(_i)		(0x05050 + ((_i) * 4)) /* 0x5050-0x505C */
> >  #define IXGBE_BMCIPVAL		0x05060
> >  #define IXGBE_BMCIP_IPADDR_TYPE	0x00000001
> > --
> > 1.9.0