[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d807ea60-c963-43cd-9652-95385258f1ad@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2024 00:29:52 +0200
From: Sergey Ryazanov <ryazanov.s.a@...il.com>
To: Antonio Quartulli <antonio@...nvpn.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/1] Introducing OpenVPN Data Channel Offload
Hi Antonio,
On 06.01.2024 23:57, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> I tend to agree that a unique large patch is harder to review, but
> splitting the code into several paches proved to be quite cumbersome,
> therefore I prefered to not do it. I believe the code can still be
> reviewed file by file, despite in the same patch.
I am happy to know that project is ongoing. But I had stopped the review
after reading these lines. You need AI to review at once "35 files
changed, 5914 insertions(+)". Last time I checked, I was human. Sorry.
Or you can see it like this: if submitter does not care, then why anyone
else should?
> ** KNOWN ISSUE:
> Upon module unloading something is not torn down correctly and sometimes
> new packets hit dangling netdev pointers. This problem did not exist
> when the RTNL API was implemented (before interface handling was moved
> to Netlink). I was hoping to get some feedback from the netdev community
> on anything that may look wrong.
A small hint, if the series is not going to be merged, then it is better
to mark it as RFC.
--
Sergey
Powered by blists - more mailing lists