[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1516890904.3715.50.camel@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 06:35:04 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Daniel Axtens <dja@...ens.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, Pravin Shelar <pshelar@....org>,
Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>,
Manish.Chopra@...ium.com, dev@...nvswitch.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Check size of packets before sending
On Fri, 2018-01-26 at 00:44 +1100, Daniel Axtens wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> > May I ask which tree are you targeting ?
> >
> > ( Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.txt )
>
> I have been targeting net-next, but I haven't pulled for about two
> weeks. I will rebase and if there are conflicts I will resend early next
> week.
>
> > Anything touching GSO is very risky and should target net-next,
> > especially considering 4.15 is released this week end.
> >
> > Are we really willing to backport this intrusive series in stable
> > trees, or do we have a smaller fix for bnx2x ?
>
> I do actually have a smaller fix for bnx2x, although it would need more work:
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/859410/
>
> It leaves open the possibility of too-large packets causing issues on
> other drivers. DaveM wasn't a fan: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/859410/#1839429
Yes, I know he prefers a generic solution, but I am pragmatic here.
Old kernels are very far from current GSO stack in net-next.
Backporting all the dependencies is going to be very boring/risky.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists