[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d3ba655b-6a70-ca68-2e3f-f063d91c12fd@salutedevices.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2023 19:48:26 +0300
From: Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov@...utedevices.com>
To: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
CC: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@...edance.com>,
<kvm@...r.kernel.org>, <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<kernel@...rdevices.ru>, <oxffffaa@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v9 0/4] vsock/virtio/vhost: MSG_ZEROCOPY
preparations
On 19.09.2023 16:35, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 03:19:54PM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>> On Tue, 2023-09-19 at 09:54 +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 07:56:00PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>> > Hi Stefano,
>>> >
>>> > thanks for review! So when this patchset will be merged to net-next,
>>> > I'll start sending next part of MSG_ZEROCOPY patchset, e.g. AF_VSOCK +
>>> > Documentation/ patches.
>>>
>>> Ack, if it is not a very big series, maybe better to include also the
>>> tests so we can run them before merge the feature.
>>
>> I understand that at least 2 follow-up series are waiting for this, one
>> of them targeting net-next and the bigger one targeting the virtio
>> tree. Am I correct?
>
> IIUC the next series will touch only the vsock core
> (net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c), tests, and documentation.
>
> The virtio part should be fully covered by this series.
>
> @Arseniy feel free to correct me!
Yes, only this patchset touches virtio code. Next patchset will be AF_VSOCK,
Documentation/ and tests. I think there is no need to merge it to the virtio
tree - we can continue in the same way as before during AF_VSOCK development,
e.g. merging it to net-next only.
Thanks, Arseniy
>
>>
>> DaveM suggests this should go via the virtio tree, too. Any different
>> opinion?
>
> For this series should be fine, I'm not sure about the next series.
> Merging this with the virtio tree, then it forces us to do it for
> followup as well right?
>
> In theory followup is more on the core, so better with net-next, but
> it's also true that for now only virtio transports support it, so it
> might be okay to continue with virtio.
>
> @Michael WDYT?
>
> Thanks,
> Stefano
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists