[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <402ea723-d154-45c9-1efe-b0022d9ea95a@salutedevices.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2023 12:08:27 +0300
From: Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov@...utedevices.com>
To: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
CC: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
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 v8 0/4] send credit update during setting
SO_RCVLOWAT
On 13.12.2023 11:43, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 08:43:07PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12.12.2023 19:12, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 06:59:03PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 12.12.2023 18:54, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 12:16:54AM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DESCRIPTION
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This patchset fixes old problem with hungup of both rx/tx sides and adds
>>>>>> test for it. This happens due to non-default SO_RCVLOWAT value and
>>>>>> deferred credit update in virtio/vsock. Link to previous old patchset:
>>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/39b2e9fd-601b-189d-39a9-914e5574524c@sberdevices.ru/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Patchset:
>>>>>
>>>>> Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But I worry whether we actually need 3/8 in net not in net-next.
>>>>
>>>> Because of "Fixes" tag ? I think this problem is not critical and reproducible
>>>> only in special cases, but i'm not familiar with netdev process so good, so I don't
>>>> have strong opinion. I guess @Stefano knows better.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, Arseniy
>>>
>>> Fixes means "if you have that other commit then you need this commit
>>> too". I think as a minimum you need to rearrange patches to make the
>>> fix go in first. We don't want a regression followed by a fix.
>>
>> I see, ok, @Stefano WDYT? I think rearrange doesn't break anything, because this
>> patch fixes problem that is not related with the new patches from this patchset.
>
> I agree, patch 3 is for sure net material (I'm fine with both rearrangement or send it separately), but IMHO also patch 2 could be.
> I think with the same fixes tag, since before commit b89d882dc9fc ("vsock/virtio: reduce credit update messages") we sent a credit update
> for every bytes we read, so we should not have this problem, right?
Agree for 2, so I think I can rearrange: two fixes go first, then current 0001, and then tests. And send it as V9 for 'net' only ?
Thanks, Arseniy
>
> So, maybe all the series could be "net".
>
> Thanks,
> Stefano
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists