[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171029111714.GB2635@nanopsycho>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 12:17:14 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, jhs@...atatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
mlxsw@...lanox.com, andrew@...n.ch,
vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
michael.chan@...adcom.com, ganeshgr@...lsio.com,
jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, saeedm@...lanox.com,
matanb@...lanox.com, leonro@...lanox.com, idosch@...lanox.com,
jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com, simon.horman@...ronome.com,
pieter.jansenvanvuuren@...ronome.com, john.hurley@...ronome.com,
alexander.h.duyck@...el.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 0/4] net: sched: block callbacks follow-up
Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 10:36:32AM CET, davem@...emloft.net wrote:
>From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
>Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 16:34:56 +0200
>
>> This patchset does a bit of cleanup of leftovers after block callbacks
>> patchset. The main part is patch 2, which restores the original handling
>> of tc offload feature flag.
>
>Jiri, this series does not apply cleanly to net-next.
I will respin.
>
>Also, you should really work out the block offload semantics
>with Jakub, continuing the discussion of patch #2.
I have some ideas. I could let driver to enable/disable already
registered callback. Will look at it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists