[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9cfdc30f-6018-499e-80a8-4447601944a4@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 08:46:48 -0700
From: "Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc: mst@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com,
alexander.h.duyck@...el.com, kubakici@...pl, jasowang@...hat.com,
loseweigh@...il.com, jiri@...nulli.us
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 net-next 4/4] netvsc: refactor notifier/event handling
code to use the failover framework
On 4/20/2018 8:28 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2018 18:42:04 -0700
> Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com> wrote:
>
>> Use the registration/notification framework supported by the generic
>> failover infrastructure.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>
> Do what you want to other devices but leave netvsc alone.
> Adding these failover ops does not reduce the code size, and really is
> no benefit. The netvsc device driver needs to be backported to several
> other distributions and doing this makes that harder.
>
> I will NAK patches to change to common code for netvsc especially the
> three device model. MS worked hard with distro vendors to support transparent
> mode, ans we really can't have a new model; or do backport.
failover_ops are specifically added to support both 2-netdev and 3-netdev models
This patch doesn't change netvsc model. It still keeps its 2-netdev model. From
netvsc, point of view it is just moving some code from netvsc to the failover module
and also i think the eventhandling and getbymac routines are more optimal.
> Plus, DPDK is now dependent on existing model.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists