[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM0EoMmEYJpezGcfvNYOjBESFTq73O=Vr2QsjWQPxPArE1J2AQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 16:47:45 -0500
From: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>,
Pedro Tammela <pctammela@...atatu.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, jiri@...nulli.us, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com, amir@...ai.me,
dcaratti@...hat.com, willemb@...gle.com, ozsh@...dia.com,
paulb@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/3] net/sched: act_pedit: fix action bind logic
On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 4:41 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2023 12:04:20 -0800 Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > > I'm with Simon - this is a long standing problem, and we weren't getting
> > > > any user complaints about this. So I also prefer to route this via
> > > > net-next, without the Fixes tags.
> > >
> > > At minimum the pedit is a fix.
> >
> > How come? What makes pedit different?
> > It's kinda hard to parse from the diff and the commit messages
> > look copy/pasted.
>
> Ah, looks like DaveM already applied this (not v2), so the discussion
> is moot.
for completion's sake:
pedit worked and then got broken at some point. The others, I believe
the review missed the details unfortunately; those features are a
requirement but someone cutnpasted and missed something.
Note: The only reason we even found this is because some hardware
(nameless at this point) capable of offloading and sharing pedit
actions didnt work. Looking closely we found the other two.
cheers,
jamal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists