[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALzJLG_u1B3PYzmzE0gLL7p0eXo9rTWfCP1kw8XE3gbA=Og+pQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 14:22:10 +0300
From: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@....mellanox.co.il>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 00/13] Mellanox 100G mlx5 resiliency and xmit path fixes
On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:14 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 17:34:37 +0300
>
>> This series provides two set of fixes to the mlx5 driver:
>> - Resiliency fixes for reset flow and internal pci errors
>> - xmit path fixes
>
> Series applied to 'net' but expecting all of this to be backported
> to -stable is unreasonable.
>
> PCI error paths, chip resets, timeout handling, etc. and some
> non-trivial changes. This is not appropriate for -stable at all.
>
> What's relevant for -stable is operational bug fixes for issues
> users will hit in regular operation.
>
> And yes this is partially my own interpreation of what is appropriate
> for -stable.
>
> But if I were to set the precendence of adding all of these to -stable
> it means people will then be able to request similar things in other
> drivers. We want to avoid having too much grey area stuff backported
> to -stable, there are too many changes going through -stable already.
Understood,
but some fixes are really really critical to us, so i would suggest
new list for -stable
net/mlx5: Avoid calling sleeping function by the health poll thread
net/mlx5: Fix wait_vital for VFs and remove fixed sleep
net/mlx5e: Copy all L2 headers into inline segment
net/mlx5e: Fix select queue callback
Thanks,
Saeed.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists