[meta-intel] [fido][PATCH 00/16] DPDK v1.8.0 & v2.0.0 for CID platforms

[Ong, Boon Leong]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Saul Wold [mailto:sgw at linux.intel.com]
>Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2015 11:54 PM
>To: Ong, Boon Leong
>Cc: meta-intel at yoctoproject.org; chia.chuah.wu at intel.com
>Subject: Re: [meta-intel][fido][PATCH 00/16] DPDK v1.8.0 & v2.0.0 for CID
>platforms
>
>On 07/07/2015 04:20 PM, Ong Boon Leong wrote:
>> Dear maintainers,
>>
>> Firstly, the patch add a layer for meta-isg just like dizzy branch.
>>
>> Then, the patchseries add the capabillity of DPDKv1.8.0 and DPDKv2.0.0
>> on meta-intel fido branch. It reuses DPDK ingredients from dizzy
>> branch as base and further customizes dpdk.inc to handle several build change
>across DPDK v1.8.0 & v2.0.0.
>>
>> Wu, Chia Chuan has contributed the enhancement for DPDK v2.0.0 and I
>> have checked and signed-off his contributions. I have validated both
>> versions are building fine and the ingredients under packages-split look healthy
>to my best knowledge.
>>
>> Chia Chuan has helped in testing the ingredients on CID platforms.
>>
>> Although it is a long series, but a lot of the commits are
>> incrementally small for review. Hope that is fine with you.
>>
>> Appreciate your help and effort in reviewing this patchseries.
>>
>> If you find them good, please kindly help to merge them into fido branch.
>>
>Something I realized would make things much better, can these patches and along
>with the QAT and zlib patches actually go into master and then be backported into
>fido?
>
>This will then keep master current and allow easier update/upgrade pathes for
>dpdk, qat and associated work.  This is the get stuff in master upstream first and
>then backport?
>
>Would this be possible?

Saul, ok. 
We will make sure that the patches are sent to be master then considered to be back-ported
Into Fido. We were doing catch-up and with this that will safe effort in keeping "upgrading".