Message ID | 20180116172027.22128-1-aring@mojatatu.com |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | net: sched: cls: add extack support | expand |
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:20:19 -0500, Alexander Aring wrote: > Hi, > > this patch adds extack support for TC classifier subsystem. The first > patch fixes some code style issues for this patch series pointed out > by checkpatch. The other patches until the last one prepares extack > handling for the TC classifier subsystem and handle generic extack > errors. > > The last patch is an example for u32 classifier to add extack support > inside the callbacks delete and change. There exists a init callback as > well, but most classifier implementation run a kalloc() once to allocate > something. Not necessary _yet_ to add extack support now. > > I know there are patches around which makes changes to these files. > I will rebase my stuff on Jiri's patches if they get in before mine. Ugh, this is going to conflict with our series too :( (and I CCed you on ours) Would it be OK for you to hold off until Jiri's code gets merged and ours comes down via bpf-next? That shouldn't take long at all. The conflicts between bpf/bpf-next/net-next are really taking their toll on us this release cycles, I would really appreciate if we could make some progress on this relatively simple series at least...
On 18-01-16 04:46 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:20:19 -0500, Alexander Aring wrote: [..] > Ugh, this is going to conflict with our series too :( (and I CCed you > on ours) > > Would it be OK for you to hold off until Jiri's code gets merged and > ours comes down via bpf-next? That shouldn't take long at all. The > conflicts between bpf/bpf-next/net-next are really taking their toll > on us this release cycles, I would really appreciate if we could make > some progress on this relatively simple series at least... > I would say precedence should be Jiri's patches, Alex's patches and then yours: Alex's patches fix the core (cls_api.c) area with proper extack for the core and then he has one patch to cover a specific use case of the u32 classifier extack. Yours is only concerned with one use case - bpf which depend on the core (that is in Alex's patches) cheers, jamal
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 17:12:57 -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: > On 18-01-16 04:46 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:20:19 -0500, Alexander Aring wrote: > > [..] > > > Ugh, this is going to conflict with our series too :( (and I CCed you > > on ours) > > > > Would it be OK for you to hold off until Jiri's code gets merged and > > ours comes down via bpf-next? That shouldn't take long at all. The > > conflicts between bpf/bpf-next/net-next are really taking their toll > > on us this release cycles, I would really appreciate if we could make > > some progress on this relatively simple series at least... > > > > I would say precedence should be Jiri's patches, Alex's patches > and then yours: > Alex's patches fix the core (cls_api.c) area with proper extack > for the core and then he has one patch to cover a specific > use case of the u32 classifier extack. Yours is only concerned > with one use case - bpf which depend on the core (that is in Alex's > patches) Our patches are concerned with propagating the extack to drivers, and nfp (and netdevsim) make use of it. I'm miffed by the fact that you jumped out with this conflicting series *after* we posted ours, and we got shot down on white space.
On 18-01-16 05:41 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 17:12:57 -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >> On 18-01-16 04:46 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:20:19 -0500, Alexander Aring wrote: >> >> [..] >> >> I would say precedence should be Jiri's patches, Alex's patches >> and then yours: >> Alex's patches fix the core (cls_api.c) area with proper extack >> for the core and then he has one patch to cover a specific >> use case of the u32 classifier extack. Yours is only concerned >> with one use case - bpf which depend on the core (that is in Alex's >> patches) > > Our patches are concerned with propagating the extack to drivers, > and nfp (and netdevsim) make use of it. > > I'm miffed by the fact that you jumped out with this conflicting series > *after* we posted ours, and we got shot down on white space. I totally empathize with the general frustration. The general rule is we fix the core first then add users (classifiers in this case). Note: Alex has a _lot_ of patches that he has been trying to send for the last little while and this one is certainly not a new set (I actually had reviewed this set). There are others. And the rule of "fix core first then add users" has been imposed on him as well. cheers, jamal
Hey David, and others, [+Alexei] On 01/17/2018 12:27 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: > On 18-01-16 05:41 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >> On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 17:12:57 -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >>> On 18-01-16 04:46 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >>>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:20:19 -0500, Alexander Aring wrote: >>> >>> [..] >>> >>> I would say precedence should be Jiri's patches, Alex's patches >>> and then yours: >>> Alex's patches fix the core (cls_api.c) area with proper extack >>> for the core and then he has one patch to cover a specific >>> use case of the u32 classifier extack. Yours is only concerned >>> with one use case - bpf which depend on the core (that is in Alex's >>> patches) >> >> Our patches are concerned with propagating the extack to drivers, >> and nfp (and netdevsim) make use of it. >> >> I'm miffed by the fact that you jumped out with this conflicting series >> *after* we posted ours, and we got shot down on white space. So I've been looking over Quentin's series just now that sits in my bucket and it looks fine to me, but merge with this one would probably end up badly for David. Therefore I'm proposing the following that should hopefully be fine and work out for Alexander and Jakub/Quentin as a consensus: I'm getting the current bpf-next stuff as PR out in a few minutes, so David can pull this in and therefore net-next will also have the dependency on nfp for Quentin's series. Then, given this one here needs another respin anyway, I would suggest to combine the missing patches from Alexander's series, and get it all out in a single patch series directly for net-next w/o any interdependency hassle. Thanks, Daniel
On 01/17/2018 01:08 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > Hey David, and others, [+Alexei] > > On 01/17/2018 12:27 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >> On 18-01-16 05:41 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 17:12:57 -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >>>> On 18-01-16 04:46 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:20:19 -0500, Alexander Aring wrote: >>>> >>>> [..] >>>> >>>> I would say precedence should be Jiri's patches, Alex's patches >>>> and then yours: >>>> Alex's patches fix the core (cls_api.c) area with proper extack >>>> for the core and then he has one patch to cover a specific >>>> use case of the u32 classifier extack. Yours is only concerned >>>> with one use case - bpf which depend on the core (that is in Alex's >>>> patches) >>> >>> Our patches are concerned with propagating the extack to drivers, >>> and nfp (and netdevsim) make use of it. >>> >>> I'm miffed by the fact that you jumped out with this conflicting series >>> *after* we posted ours, and we got shot down on white space. > > So I've been looking over Quentin's series just now that sits in my > bucket and it looks fine to me, but merge with this one would probably > end up badly for David. Therefore I'm proposing the following that > should hopefully be fine and work out for Alexander and Jakub/Quentin > as a consensus: > > I'm getting the current bpf-next stuff as PR out in a few minutes, so > David can pull this in and therefore net-next will also have the > dependency on nfp for Quentin's series. Then, given this one here > needs another respin anyway, I would suggest to combine the missing > patches from Alexander's series, and get it all out in a single patch > series directly for net-next w/o any interdependency hassle. Ok, bpf-next PR with the nfp dependencies is now out, so all this can make progress here. I've therefore purged Jakub's extack series from bpf queue, so a combined series can target net-next directly then. Thanks, Daniel